Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

가. 피고인 ⑴ 사실오인 ㈎ 대부업등의등록및금융이용자보호에관한법률위반의 점 피고인은 금전대부를 업으로 하지 않았고, D으로부터 제한이자율을 초과한 이자를 지급받지 않았다.

㈏ 배임의 점 피고인은 계원들로부터 12회 계불입금 중 일부를 받지 못하였고, 피해자 H으로부터 1, 4, 6회 계불입금을 받지 못하였다.

Since J and L introduced by the victim H did not pay the limit money, and the Defendant suffered damages on behalf of the Defendant, there is a justifiable reason that the Defendant was unable to pay the limit money to the victim H.

B. The first instance judgment on the unfair sentencing (the first instance judgment: the fine of 2.5 million won, the second instance judgment: the fine of 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (in respect of the judgment of the court below of second instance, unreasonable sentencing)’s punishment of the court of second instance is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (i) This Court rendered a decision to jointly deliberate on the appeal cases against the judgment of the first instance.

Each of the judgments of the first instance against the defendant shall be sentenced to a single sentence in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

In this respect, the first instance judgment can no longer be maintained.

B. The first instance judgment can no longer be maintained in this respect, since the Prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of the first instance as stated below, and this Court permitted changes in the indictment of the first instance.

Article 25(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the first instance court and the first instance court duly adopted and investigated the evidence as follows: (i) the violation of the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Financial Users.