A. In accordance with Article 32(6) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies”), the lower court’s judgment, which did not separately decide and decide on the violation of the Act on Finance-Related Acts and subordinate statutes and other offences under Article 38 of the Criminal Act, even though it is necessary to separately decide and decide on the concurrent crimes under Article 32(6) of the same Act, is unlawful.

B. Sentencing (defendants) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Article 32(6) of the Act on the Management of Financial Companies (amended by Act No. 32(6) provides for separate hearings and rulings on the violation of the finance-related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Act on the Financial Industry Specializing in Credit. However, unlike Article 31 that provides for the requirements for approval of change to a major shareholder (the major shareholder of a financial company is divided into the largest shareholder and the major shareholder under Article 2 subparag. 6), Article 32 provides for the requirements for maintaining eligibility for the largest shareholder among the major shareholders of a financial company who already acquired the status of a major shareholder through the above approval of change. Article 32 provides for separate hearings and rulings under Article 31, and Article 31 provides for separate examinations and rulings under Article 32,00,000 won, and Article 32(6) provides for a separate examination and rulings under Article 32(6) as well as prompt examination of financial relations under Article 32(2)2 of the Act.