2. The judgment of the Defendant, without registering credit business, has harmed the financial transaction order and increased the economic burden of the obligor who lacks economic capacity by applying the interest rate much higher than the interest rate prescribed by the Interest Limitation Act without registering the credit business. In light of the method of the instant crime, the period and frequency of the crime, the size of the loan amount, the degree exceeding the interest rate, the circumstances after the crime, and the Defendant’s age and character and conduct, the punishment imposed by the lower court is not deemed unreasonable.

In addition, the defendant's grounds for appeal include the purport of changing part of the fine to be sentenced to community service work. However, after the decision of this case became final and conclusive, the defendant can apply for the detention of unpaid fine on behalf of community service in accordance with the Act on Special Cases concerning the Execution of Community Service for Fine Unpaid Persons. Thus, the defendant's above assertion does not constitute legitimate grounds for appeal against the judgment of the court below.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

(However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, "eight persons" as stated in the seven to eight lines of criminal facts of the judgment of the court below ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure shall be read as "seven persons," and "F" as stated in the column for the borrower in paragraph 20 of the Code on Criminal Procedure shall be corrected as "C