대부업등의등록및금융이용자보호에관한법률위반
All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) registration of loan business, etc. and the loan of money as stipulated in Article 2 of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users (hereinafter “Loan Business Act”) include not only the direct payment of money but also the case where economic benefits accrue to the transaction partner such as installment financing and financial lease.
In addition, this case’s department store payment claim is a claim arising from a department store’s credit granted to its members equivalent to the purchase price of goods, which constitutes a claim under a loan agreement as provided in the Loan Business Act.
In addition, even though the court below did not determine any longer, the department store of this case is a credit financial institution, which is defined in Article 2 of the Loan Business Act, as a "Concurrent Credit Business Operator."
Therefore, the defendants' business of collecting claims from the department stores of this case, which are claims arising from the lending contract of this case, constitutes the business of collecting loan claims.
Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendants not guilty on the grounds that the department store price claim of this case does not constitute “claim under the loan agreement,” and there is an error in the misapprehension of legal principles.
2. The facts charged in this case
A. Defendant A is a person who runs the business of purchasing a credit card price claim on the Hyundai department store in the name of the company B, which is a limited company in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E building, and collecting it to the debtor.
Any person who intends to engage in the business of collecting loan bonds shall register with the Mayor/Do Governor having jurisdiction over the relevant place of business for each place of business, and shall register with the Financial Services Commission from July 25, 2016.
Nevertheless, the Defendant did not register with the competent Mayor/Do Governor or the Financial Services Commission, and had a total of KRW 24,722,921,203, a total of 15,931 times from December 21, 2008 to February 21, 2017.