1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that Defendant A was guilty of both of the violation of the Act on the Registration of Loan Business, etc. and the Protection of Financial Users (excluding the portion without charge) among the facts charged against Defendant A, on the grounds as stated

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles.

2. According to the record as to Defendant B’s appeal, Defendant B did not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal, and did not submit the grounds for appeal within the statutory period.

3. As to the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A on the ground that there was no proof of a crime regarding the registration of the loan business, etc. listed in the list of offenses No. 24 among the facts charged against Defendant A and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users, and sentenced Defendant A not guilty.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, it did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.