(a) In order to raise the additional interest rate agreed upon in a loan agreement during the loan period, such as computer, etc., the additional agreement shall be prepared in accordance with sufficient agreement with the customer, or shall be duly notified to the customer;

The Defendants, without going through such procedures, input interest rate higher than the additional interest rate stipulated in the loan agreement into an electronic device, thereby allowing N to receive interest in an amount higher than the agreed interest rate. Thus, the Defendants’ act constitutes fraud such as computer, etc.

Therefore, the interest rate of this case does not constitute fraud by using computers, etc.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Defendants A and B, who are related to the principal office, including the Defendants’ instruction and solicitation, maintained the above policy by being aware of the fact that the business store is bound to increase the interest rate without permission in order to implement the policy for improving their profitability, and the situation that the unauthorized interest rate is continuously being committed at the business establishment, and the rest of the Defendants ordered the employees in charge of corporate loan to increase the interest rate without permission at the business establishment. Thus, the Defendants’ act is deemed to have ordered or conspired to commit the crime of fraud, such as computer, etc.

Therefore, the Defendants instructed or conspired to commit the crime.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Summary of the facts charged 1) Defendant A, who is in office as the Director of the Enterprise Business Headquarters of N Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “N”), was in general in charge of corporate credit-related affairs.