2. Determination is based on the following facts: (a) the act of receiving interest exceeding the interest rate and non-registered loan business, such as the instant crime, exceeds the interest rate and the sound development of the loan business; and (b) social harm is high, such as impairing the sound development of the loan business and causing damage to the financial users; (c) the period during which the Defendant was running a non-registered loan business is short; and (d) the interest that the Defendant received in excess of the interest rate exceeds KRW 160 million

However, under Article 10(1) of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment, etc. of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds under the law of the basis of additional collection, the additional collection under the above provision is discretionary and is subject to the court's discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2451, Jun. 14, 2007); the defendant confessions all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake; the defendant agreed smoothly with a considerable number of debtors; the defendant has no history of punishment exceeding the fine; the defendant's age, sex behavior, environment, the process and consequence of the crime of this case; and the various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, are considered as being too unfasible and thus unfair. Thus, the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.