logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.20 2017고정2463
풍속영업의규제에관한법률위반
Text

The Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendants are using the second to fifth floor of the above building in the operation of the rest telecom with the trade name of “E” in Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant rest telecom”).

At around 16:30 on June 20, 2017, Defendants conspired to do obscene acts by allowing male customers to receive admission fees and act of similarity in the narrow room.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants and the defense counsel denied the charges by asserting that male customers did not engage in sexual intercourse in the above room with mutual consent, and that there was no participation from the Defendants.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the written statement prepared in F, which corresponds to the facts charged, cannot be believed as it is, and the remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, which led the Defendants to have male visitors engage in obscene acts or encourage them to do so at the above telecom.

It is difficult to see it.

1) The police officer stated that “F, who is an employee of the instant rest shop, provides a place to make same-sexs, and is aware that Internet advertising blobs are Defendant B.” However, in this court, the investigating police officer provided money and advertised in the rest room where the police officer had worked for him by asking how much customers would find.

The police officer prepared a written statement different from the fact, which would cause the enemy in such a manner.

was stated.

The Defendants did not appear to have any objective material that the Defendants advertised the instant telecom at a place where male sexual intercourse could be performed, or that they operated the Blue book. Therefore, the Defendants were credibility in F’s legal statement.

2) On the date and time indicated in the facts charged as above, G (45 Do) paid KRW 6,000, and even the period during which G (45 Do) went into the instant telecom, was also a guest.

In agreement with H(26) the second floor studs.

arrow