The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Defendant

B is a person who engages in a loan business under the trade name "E" in South-si, Namyang-si, D Apartment, 106 Dong 1401, and Defendant A is an employee of the above lending company.

On November 20, 2015, the Defendants provided a loan of KRW 3 million to F in the insular coffee shop located in the Changdong-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City on a three-month basis, and granted 1.55 million won after deducting KRW 1.155 million in the name of the prior interest and fee, thereby having received interest at 248.65% per annum.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to receive interest exceeding the interest rate limit.

Since conviction of the above facts of crime is recognized, it is not judged as to the facts of crime which have been indicted alternatively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Statement made by the witness F in the fifth public trial records, and statement made by the police prepared by the police against F in the past;

1. Business registration certificate, certificate of loan business registration, standard contract for loan transaction, certificate of work process, certificate of cash custody, each certificate of cash borrowing;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Relevant legal provisions and the Defendants’ choice of punishment on criminal facts: Registration of each old loan business, etc. and the Protection of Financial Users Act (Amended by Act No. 14072, Mar. 3, 2016); Articles 19(2)3 and 8 of the Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; and selection of fines

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendants who bear the costs of lawsuit: The Defendants and their defense counsel asserted that: (a) the Defendants received interest of KRW 1.5 million from F within the statutory interest rate; and (b) the Defendants did not receive interest of KRW 248% per annum as stated in the facts charged of this case.

The following circumstances, which were duly adopted and examined by this Court, i.e., the F, from investigative agencies to this Court, are deemed as follows: < Amended by Act No. 1451, Nov. 19, 2016>