Posted October. 08, 2007 08:05,
A court ruled that bar hostesses cannot be charged with prostitution even if their solicitation of rich customers involves sexual intercourse, just as long as their patrons do not pay them any money for sex.
The court also ruled that better sales at the club following the solicitations were marginal relative to the charges filed.
Womens advocacy groups decry the decision, calling the judge innocent of the real deals made at bars and clubs.
Prostitution disguised as business solicitations
A female job recruiter, Hong, age 42, introduced three hostesses to Yoon, 32, the owner of the club named by the court, at a coffee shop in Gangnam Gu, Seoul in June 2007.
Yoon made advance payments of $2,500 to $6,000 to the three women, and they started working at a club run by Yoon in Japan. Yoon took good care of rich customers, and assigned hostesses to them to cultivate their patronage.
The hostesses themselves chipped in. They voluntarily asked the rich patrons out and met them outside the club. They all entered sexual relationships with them as well to keep them coming to the club.
But the hostesses did not take money for the sexual favors granted. The sexual solicitations were geared toward making the club more money instead.
No money, no prostitution, says court
Yoon and the recruiter were indicted on prostitution arrangement charges. But the court found them not guilty and threw out the case.
The court held that prostitution is not proven without any exchange of money between the two parties. The court also ruled that business solicitations resulting in sexual intercourse between employee and customer do not constitute prostitution, and that whether or not the solicitations boosted sales is a marginal point.
Judge Gu Hui-guen of the Seoul District Court explained yesterday in a statement, The court has not found any evidence showing that the patrons promised to pay or actually paid any money to the defendants or to the owner in return for the sexual relationships. The defendants, as employees, were free to refuse any sexual advances of the patrons, and they were not forced to meet their customers against their will.
Judge Gu added, The sexual solicitation led to more frequent visits by the patron and to more sales for the club. But the facts do not indicate that the owner or the defendants charged additional money for the relationship. Further, the club does not seem to have been a prostitution parlor in any respect.
The court found the recruiter guilty not of prostitution, but of unauthorized job recruitment. It fined the recruiter $5,000.
Womens advocacy groups decry the ruling
Womens advocacy groups decry the decision, criticizing the judge as too innocent.
Advocacy group leader Jeong Mi-rye said, According to the facts found by the court, the hostesses volunteered to have sexual intercourse with their patrons. Is it believable that they slept with the men for free? Lots of bar and club owners use this loophole to avoid prosecution.