Illegal prostitution in downtown building; landlords who turned a blind eye also found guilty - South Korea

The owner of an illegal massage parlor that was operating in a building in the city center and the company that rented the building were all found guilty.
On the 15th, the Changwon District Court in South Korea announced that a man who engaged in prostitution solicitation and other such acts would be punished.
Defendant A, a man in his 20s who was indicted on charges of violating the law, was sentenced to one year and six months in prison with three years of probation. He was also ordered to perform 120 hours of community service and pay a fine of 70 million won (approximately 69,000 yen).
Defendant B, a man in his 60s who rented an adult entertainment establishment to Defendant A, was also sentenced to a fine of 3 million won (approximately JPY 310,000) and a surcharge of 7.86 million won (approximately JPY 820,000).
From October 2022 to September 2023, defendant A received payment for prostitution from customers at a building in Seongsan-gu, Changwon City, Gyeongsangnam-do.
He was indicted on charges of receiving the money and operating a massage parlor. Defendant A provided beds and shower facilities, and created six locked rooms to accommodate customers. He installed security cameras in the parlor.
During the time of the crime, the police warned her that she was engaged in prostitution and that she could be punished for operating illegally, but she continued to operate the business.
Defendant B also rented the building to Defendant A, despite being notified by the police that it was a place for prostitution, thereby facilitating Defendant A's prostitution business.
Defendant A claimed that he did not know that the building was being used as a place of prostitution, but the court did not accept this.
The court said, "Defendant A actively promoted prostitution through internet advertisements, which were highly contagious and had a considerable duration and profits.
"We took into consideration the fact that Defendant B has not seriously reflected on his mistakes," he said in explaining the sentencing decision.