However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Anyone who intends to run a credit business shall register with the competent administrative agency, and shall not receive interest exceeding 30% per annum from a unregistered credit service provider, if the loan is made by such unregistered credit service provider.

Nevertheless, on January 16, 2010, without registering credit business, the Defendant loaned KRW 2,500,000 to C from 1208, Seo-gu, Gwangju, Seo-gu, 112,1208, as the due date for repayment of one month, and received KRW 100,000 (interest rate of 48.7%) as the interest rate.

In addition, from around that time to May 8, 2013, the Defendant loaned 442,80,000 won in total over 54 times, as shown in the attached list of crimes, and received interest exceeding the limited interest rate.

Accordingly, the Defendant did not register with the competent authorities, operated credit business, and received interest exceeding the limited interest rate.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement prepared D and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment of Details of transactions in suspect accounts);

1. Relevant Article of facts constituting an offense, Article 19 (1) 1, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users, Article 19 (2) 3, and Article 11 (1) of the same Act, and Article 19 (2) 3 of the same Act, and Article 11 (1) of the same Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under the Criminal Act was that the Defendant engaged in illegal credit business by receiving interest exceeding the limited interest rate prescribed by the relevant laws by setting a large amount of money equivalent to KRW 440 million in total for more than three years while running unregistered credit business. The Defendant was punished by a fine for the same type of crime as the instant crime even though he had the record of being punished, and immediately repeated the instant crime. However, it seems that it is necessary to punish the Defendant, in light of the fact that the Defendant was punished by a fine for the same type of crime, and immediately repeated the instant crime.