beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The Defendant is a person who has operated a credit business office under the trade name “D” on the first floor of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C.
Any person who intends to engage in credit business or loan brokerage business shall register with the Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, or Do Governor having jurisdiction over the relevant place of business, and in cases of unregistered credit service providers, he/she shall not receive interest exceeding 30% per annum.
Nevertheless, around April 20, 2013, the Defendant loaned KRW 1 million to E without registering with the competent authority, and received annual interest rate of KRW 81% from April 15, 2013 to December 29, 2013, by paying KRW 1.2 million per week, and violated the restriction on the interest rate by lending 19 times in total, as stated in the attached list of crimes, from April 15, 2013 to December 29, 2013.
Accordingly, the defendant operated credit business without registering with the competent authorities, and violated the restriction on the interest rate.
2. Determination
A. The facts charged in the instant case are that the Defendant, while running a unregistered credit business, lent money to the lender listed in the attached list of crimes E including E (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the lender of the instant case”), and received interest exceeding the statutory interest rate, and first, we examine whether the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, lent money to the lender of the instant case, thereby running a credit business.
B. The defendant's interrogation protocol against the defendant, which is consistent with the facts that he had engaged in credit business by lending money to the lender of this case as stated in the facts charged, the witness Eul's statement in the third trial record to the effect that "the person who was found at the time of failure to pay the money" was the defendant, and the police's statement in the above purport, and the police's statement in E's statement to the same effect (Evidence No. 5 of the evidence list), and the police's statement in the police's statement to E, the execution officer of the court