A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the facts, the Defendant, as shown in the List of Crimes Nos. 12, 13, and 37 attached to the lower judgment, could be recognized as having been paid for loan brokerage from CU Co., Ltd. and V, the counterparty to the loan.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the fact misunderstanding, the court below's decision that found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged is justified and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor in the judgment below.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. Sentencing unfair sentencing is not less than the period of running the Defendant’s unregistered loan brokerage business, and the amount of brokerage is extremely large, such as a large amount of loan brokerage, the payment for large amount of loan brokerage, and the social harm caused by the unregistered loan brokerage business is not significant. However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects against the Defendant, the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, and all other sentencing factors indicated in the argument of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, method, frequency, size, period, circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is justified.