All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the sentence imposed by the court below for two years of suspended sentence of ten months for each of the defendants A and B, probation and 200 hours for probation, community service, confiscation (the defendant A), the defendant C: imprisonment for two years of suspended execution of six months for probation, probation and 200 hours for probation and confiscation) is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendants in collusion with the business of arranging commercial sex acts, and the Defendant A placed an advertisement on the above commercial sex acts. After renting an officetel, the Defendant A played the role of distributing advertising leaflets and transporting the commercial sex to the commercial sex acts users by transporting the commercial sex acts to the commercial sex acts users. In that it is highly likely that the human rights of the commercial sex acts women might be lost in the course of commercialization of female gender and pursuing commercial sex acts, the punishment of half-value of the act is more severe.

Furthermore, even though Defendant A had been tried for the same kind of crime, Defendant C had already been punished for the same crime but had the record of punishment by a summary order due to the same crime, and considering the frequency of the crime in this case, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendants.

However, the Defendants seems to have committed the instant crimes against their own mistake.

In addition, the defendant A is the most difficult economic form to support the defendant A and her children, and the defendant B did not have the same criminal record so far and should support the negligent money which is not good health, and the defendant C did not have a leading role in the act of arranging sexual traffic by taking charge of transporting the sexual traffic users.

In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the above Defendants are highly likely to repeat a crime due to the employment of Defendant A and Defendant B, etc. from the construction company, and from the short-term company, and the age, character and conduct of the Defendants.