The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of a fine of KRW 5 million imposed by the court below is too unfilled and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below's act of arranging sexual traffic is not so severe that it is necessary for the court to impose severe punishment on the grounds that the defendant has been punished once a fine for the same kind of sexual traffic brokerage crime, etc., but it is recognized that the defendant recognized all the facts charged and reflects his mistake, the defendant has no criminal record exceeding the fine, the business period of arranging sexual traffic is relatively short and there are no profits acquired thereby. In addition, considering all the sentencing conditions in the records of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship and circumstances after the crime, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is clearly without merit. Thus, it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act and is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure; however, the court below’s decision ex officio pursuant to Article 19(2) and Article 6(1) of the former School Health Act (amended by Act No. 13946, Feb. 3, 2016) shall be amended as “Article 19(2) and Article 6(1)9 of the former School Health Act (amended by Act No. 13946, Feb. 3, 2016).”