Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of six months.

, however, the defendant.

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (a year of imprisonment, an additional collection of KRW 193,345,340) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of the legal doctrine: The lower court deemed that the amount of KRW 99 million paid as office rent, out of the amount received by A as commission fees, was the profit that Defendant B received as compensation for the loan in the name of Defendant B, and additionally collected the amount from Defendant B; and the said amount was paid by A while operating the office under his own account.

Since A is not the money paid by Defendant B in return for the direct lending of name, the office rent of KRW 90 million cannot be collected from Defendant B.

(2) Improper sentencing: The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (a prison term of eight months, a suspended sentence of one year, and a collection of 128,820,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Defendant A made a confession and made a mistake in his judgment as to Defendant A.

Defendant

It is also recognized that A has a family member to support A.

However, the crime of this case is a crime that causes damage to the social trust in the attorney system by a person, other than an attorney-at-law, while conducting legal affairs for a long period of time by lending the attorney-at-law name, and that is not an action that causes damage to the attorney-at-law system.

The judgment below

There is no special change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the sentence.

In addition, in full view of various circumstances, such as Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court appears to be appropriate, and it is not recognized that the sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

3. Judgment as to Defendant B

A. (1) Part of the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the calculation of additional collection charges (1) an attorney-at-law necessary sunset or additional collection under Article 116 of the Act violates Article 34 of the same Act or Articles 109 subparagraph 1, 110, and 110 of the same Act.