Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

2. A favorable circumstance is that the Defendants were located in the same building as the husband and wife, each of the crimes of this case is recognized and reflected, the absence of the same kind of power, and the payment of evaded taxes is deemed to have been made.

However, in full view of the circumstances of each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, and environment, including the fact that the Defendants paid a total of KRW 528,300,000,000 to the Defendants for three and nine years, and that the Defendants evaded taxes in a considerable amount of money, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be somewhat unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 70(3)3 and 19(5)3 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act; the choice of imprisonment

B. Defendant B: Articles 70(4)6 and 19(5)4 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act; the choice of imprisonment

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act regarding community service order;