2. Determination

(a) The summary of the facts charged shall not receive any consideration of brokerage from the other party to the transaction for whom a loan is made;

On September 12, 2012 and September 24, 2012, the Defendant, in collusion with a person who was in bad name, had B borrow a total of KRW 20 million from a bank, and received a brokerage commission from the other party to the transaction who was given the loan by receiving KRW 5,830,000 from B in return.

B. According to Articles 19(2)6 and 11-2(2) of the former Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users (amended by Act No. 11544, Dec. 11, 2012; hereinafter “former Act”), the lower court determined that a loan broker is not entitled to the consideration for brokerage from the opposite contractual party to whom the loan was granted, and is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won. According to Article 2(3) of the former Act, the term “loan broker” means a person who has registered a loan brokerage business pursuant to Article 3 of the former Act.

Therefore, even though the Defendant had registered loan brokerage business, he/she should be punished pursuant to the above provision of the former Act. However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant had registered loan brokerage business in accordance with the former Act, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute the case where there is no proof of criminal facts, and thus, the Defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article

C. First of all, the court below accepted loan brokerage commission for this reason.