The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds of appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and eight hours of community service) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected his mistake is favorable to the Defendant.

However, even in order to prevent the spread of illegal sexual traffic business establishments and to establish a sound sexual culture, it is necessary to cut off and severe punishment for those who operate or participate in illegal sexual traffic business establishments. Although the Defendant had already been punished twice due to the same criminal act, the Defendant again committed the crime in this case, and the nature of the crime in this case is not easy, and the possibility of criticism is considerable. In full view of the records and arguments, such as the equity of sentencing with the same or similar case, the Defendant’s age, family environment, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.