Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant 1’s violation of the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Registration of Finance Users and Protection of Finance Users, Defendant 1 merely introduced that he borrowed money from B and C, but did not do so, it does not constitute a loan act as a business and does not violate social rules, and it does not constitute a business of lending to many and unspecified persons, and it does not violate social rules. In relation to the daily number of crimes (1) in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant did not lend a loan or provided a auxiliary act merely because he did not do so or did not merely assist the Defendant in the act of lending. 2) The judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of unfair sentencing (1 year, 13, 20, 24, 25, 25, 29 through 63, 69 through 72, 74, 81 or 82.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1 of the facts-finding investigation, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the charge of each official conflict against AF, AI, and attempted attempted attack against AO is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentencing of the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the method of financing, the period of lending, the number of persons borrowing money and lending, the background or process of lending, the high interest deduction method, the amount of interest, the amount of the defendant's occupation, etc., it can be recognized that the defendant conducted unregistered credit business in collusion with B, C, or received interest exceeding the limited interest rate, and the defendant merely introduced or subsidized.