The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the part that the Defendant lent money without interest does not constitute a credit business since it is not for profit-making purposes.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 20 million won) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Regarding the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users provides that “credit business” means a business of lending money (including providing money by discounting notes, transfer for security, or any other similar means; hereinafter “loan”), or a business of collecting claims arising from a loan agreement from a person who has registered a credit business pursuant to Article 3 (hereinafter “credit business entity”) or a credit financial institution, by acquiring loans from such person.” Here, “business” means continuing to engage in the same act. Whether it constitutes “business” refers to a continuous lending of lending or brokerage, regardless of whether the said person or material facilities are simply installed, and whether it constitutes “business” should be determined in accordance with social norms, by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as lending of money (including lending of money by discount of notes, transfer for security, or any other similar means; hereinafter “loan”) and the purpose or scale of such act, and the following fact that the Defendant continued to borrow money from 200 billion won to 9.7 billion won after being duly admitted by the lower court’s evidence.