All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) In light of the fact that the legal knowledge of the Defendant is merely a general average person, that the name lending act of the Defendant made a contradictory statement from the name lending act of the Defendant, and that the term “title lending” cannot be subject to confession, etc., the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged against the Defendant on the basis of the confession made by the prosecution.

(2) The lower court’s sentence (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are guilty of the facts charged against the Defendant as evidence of partial statement in the original instance court, the second interrogation protocol of A, the first interrogation protocol of the prosecution, and the first interrogation protocol of the prosecution. However, the name lending cannot be the subject of confession, and the name lending cannot be the subject of legal judgment or evaluation, as well as A’s investigation agency and the court testimony of the original court are inconsistent with each other, and thus, it shall not be used as evidence of guilt.

In addition, the evidence presented by the court below as evidence of guilt shall not be used as evidence without additional proof because it is merely the defendant's consent to the court below's rejection or denial of the purport of proof on the grounds of the litigation economy, etc.

The defendant has been actually directed and supervised throughout the whole individual rehabilitation business, and operated the defendant's calculation and responsibility. However, only delegated certain administrative affairs such as loan business, advertisement contract, etc. to the employees including A and did not allow A to handle legal affairs in the name of the defendant in the name of the lawyer.

(2) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, additional collection of KRW 116,000) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant C (1) Confession of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles, and confessions at A’s prosecution are “B.”