logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.01 2018고단1961
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)등
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

However, the above judgment against the Defendants for two years from the date of this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendants violated the Act on the Punishment of Acts, Etc. of Arranging-gu Officetel 804, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, for the purpose of having female employees operate the term "E" under the trade name "E" in order to mislead male customers to their sexual intercourse with their descendants, and installed a waiting room consisting of two guest rooms in the above 804, two toilets, one toilet, and one partitions, and the Defendant A provided accommodation at the above business establishment and provided advertisements on the Internet, and provided guidance to female employees and provided management of female employees, and the Defendant B conspired to provide security deposits for the lease of the above business establishment, and to take charge of publicity business and purchase equipment through the Internet "F", etc.

From the beginning of November 2017 to March 13, 2018, the Defendants received 40,000 won or 60,000 won in cash per 20 minutes from the nameless customers at the above business establishment from the beginning of November 13, 2018, and had his/her employees H, I, etc. do an act of similar nature, such as having sexual intercourse with a male guest by having him/her go through his/her hand and his/her sexual organ, thereby engaging in commercial sex acts.

2. No person who violates the employment stability Act shall recruit workers for the purpose of having them be engaged in a job involving sexual traffic taking part of his/her body, such as mouth or anus, or in a job involving sexual traffic using implements;

Nevertheless, Defendant B conspiredd with the Defendants on November 2017 to March 13, 2018, and recruited employees, including I, by reporting the interview of I et al. reported to Defendant A et al. and having them employed at the business establishment referred to in paragraph (1).

3. A person in violation of the Educational Environment Protection Act may engage in physical contacts between unspecified persons, exposure to a sealed part, etc., or engage in any other similar activity in an educational environment protection zone;

arrow