All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of one year and two months; surcharge 28,54,000 won; imprisonment of one year; surcharge 1 year; surcharge 17,376,00 won) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendants include: (a) the Defendants recognized both the instant crime and against their mistake; (b) the Defendants did not have the same criminal history; and (c) Defendant B was the primary offender; and (d) the Defendants’ family members appealed against the Defendants.

However, the crime of arranging sexual traffic, such as the crime of this case, does not have a significant social hazard, such as that the commercialization of women's sex and harms the sound sexual culture and good morals, and even if it is necessary to punish the owner of an illegal sexual traffic business establishment in order to prevent the spread of the illegal sexual traffic business establishment, and to establish a sound sexual culture, ② The crime of this case is that the defendants, after renting an officetel located in Incheon Bupyeong-gu G, employed female employees, engaged in sexual traffic business systematically and closely through the Internet, with the recruitment of female employees, not only up to the number of female employees who engaged in sexual traffic in the above officetels but also up to 1,00 (1,034 items, and 968 items). The crime of arranging sexual traffic, such as the crime of this case, is very large,