이자제한법위반등
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
1. An individual who violates the Interest Limitation Act shall receive interest within the scope not exceeding twenty-five percent (25%) per annum, which is the maximum interest rate under a contract for lending and borrowing money prescribed by the Presidential Decree, for the stabilization of the national economic life and the realization of economic justice;
On April 2014, the Defendant lent KRW 10 million to the victim B, who is the debtor, at an unsound place, and received KRW 600,000 per month from November 2014 to December 1, 2015 as the interest.
(72%) (2%) per annum;
On January 5, 2015, the Defendant leased KRW 300,000 to the same victim and received KRW 300,000 from the same victim as prior interest, and 300,000 as interest on the date in an irregular place.
(133%) (13%) per annum;
On February 4, 2016, the Defendant lent KRW 7 million to the same victim at an irregular place, and received KRW 1 million as prior interest and KRW 1 million as the date interest.
(Interest Rate 200%) Accordingly, the Defendant loaned money to the victim and received interest exceeding 25 percent per annum, which is the highest interest rate.
2. No person who violates the Fair Collection of Claims Act shall engage in any act which seriously undermines privacy or peace in business by repeatedly or at night visits an obligor, or by making words, letters, sound, images, or goods, such as telephones, reach the obligor or his/her related persons, without any justifiable grounds, and thus arouses fear or apprehension;
Nevertheless, on July 11, 2018, the Defendant called the victim's cell phone with the cell phone of the Defendant at an irregular place and called "to pay interest and pay the principal to the Defendant. I shall do so. I shall do so. I shall do so." On or around the 30th day of the same month, and the same year.
8. 8. Around several times, the Plaintiff expressed a desire to “for the same year.....” on the ground that the Defendant did not pay his/her debt by telephone to the victim.
Accordingly, the defendant calls repeatedly to the victim who is an obligor without any justifiable reason.