대부업등의등록및금융이용자보호에관한법률위반
1. Of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B, the part concerning the crime as set forth in paragraph 5 below and the collection shall be attached.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the list of crimes by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, U(No. 42 annually), V (No. 55 annually), W (No. 56 annually), X (No. 92 annually), and Y (No. 132 annually), the defendants do not lend money to the defendants as credit service providers.
Attached Form
From among the crime sight table, the part of the Z (13th annual), AA (16th annual), and Z (25th annual) is the same as the Z has conducted financial transactions using the name of AA, which is a father of the unschool children, and there is no reason for the defendants to lend the Z with 30 million won at one time.
Attached Form
In the list of crimes, AB (No. 10,96 annually), and AC (No. 24 annually) overlap with AB and AC as the same person.
Attached Form
The part of AD (100 per year) and AD (85 per year) in the crime sight table overlaps with that of the defendants lending five million won to AD once.
B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (Defendant B: imprisonment of March and imprisonment of July, additional collection of KRW 67,073,60, Defendant D: 2 years of suspended execution in June) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, (1) the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated by the evidence, i.e., U,V, W, X, andY are many financial transactions between the Defendants and U,V, W, X, and Y. The amount is the large amount. The Defendants were either U, V, W, X, X, or the Defendants did not lend money to U, V,W, X, X, and Y as credit service providers, and the Defendants did not submit materials. Comprehensively considering the fact that the Defendants were fully admitted to this part of the facts charged at the lower court, the above Defendants’ assertion is without merit.
(2) According to the financial transactions between R, Defendant D and Z, and AA, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the part concerning Z and AA, i.e., the Z and AA.