logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.15 2017고단6991
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the owner of a sexual traffic business with the trade name “C”.

From the end of March 2017 to May 15:10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) leased Nos. 821 and 1216 of the Seoul Gangnam-gu Officetel; (b) placed a female employee engaged in sexual traffic; and (c) placed an advertisement on the advertisement site of a commercial sex business establishment, such as “F”, “G”, etc. after advertising the said business establishment; and (d) received the price for sexual traffic from the male buyers, and then arranged commercial sex acts by guiding the female employee and sexual intercourse with the said officetel, waiting for the female employee.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Suppression photographs;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of lease agreement;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as Mediation, etc. of elective sexual traffic for facts constituting an offense and Article 19 of the Act on the Punishment of such Acts;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. The act of arranging sexual traffic for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act has distorted sex culture by commercializing sex, and such crime is highly harmful to society by making women more away from their lives. However, although the nature of the crime is not good, it is against the recognition of the facts charged in this case, although the crime is committed during the repeated offense period, there is no history of punishment for the same crime, and the scale of the act is not large without the lapse of the brokerage period for sexual traffic, it appears that the defendant's age, sex behavior, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, crime records, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments and records of this case shall be determined as the same sentence as the order.

arrow