Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and two months.

except that from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 20, 2008, the Defendants conspired to lend KRW 300,000,000 to F from Jung-gu, Daejeon to the competent authority without registering with the competent authority, and until September 5, 2012, the Defendants engaged in credit business that lends KRW 52,349,000,000 in total over 207 occasions, such as the list of crimes in attached Form 207.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Each legal statement of witness BGH;

1. Books related to each loan project (No. 47242526 No. 526);

1. Detailed statement of each loan project (No. 8 through 19 No. 5 of the evidence list);

1. Copies of each passbook and details of transactions (Evidence No. 202234555556672) 1. Each investigation report (Evidence List No. 6061783869090901011114111415128124812788133340), respectively;

1. Written replys to the answer in wartime (No. 67 No. 500);

1. Matters of special account characteristics, list of credit business days, list of bond amounts, list of delivery of suspects, list of joint bonds (No. 79 through 82 No. 53)

1. Details of check inquiries, each reply form and copy of check, check analysis sheet, check list and reply form, passbook copy, check copy (Evidence No. 84879496969898911213) and copy of check;

1. The Defendant A’s guilty ground for conviction of the Defendant A of each transaction slips (Evidence List No. 125126), comparison table (Evidence List No. 134), and Defendant A’s written application for transaction (Evidence List No. 141) in collusion with Defendant B did not have engaged in credit business. However, in full view of the following circumstances based on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the facts constituting the crime in the judgment were proven to the extent that there was no reasonable doubt, and thus, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

① As a result of the confirmation of the original book prepared by Defendant B in the court, the credibility is high due to the lack of circumstances to deem that the original book was prepared in a continuous and repeated manner in light of the color and shape of the written body, etc.

If Defendant B independently carried out credit business, various forms of books, such as by day and month of the debtor.