The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. With respect to the intermediation of a contact loan among the crimes of mistake of facts in this case, where where B, who is the operator of the instant singinging room, had arranged a contact loan by telephone, and the Defendant did not have participated therein.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (fine 1,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, at the time of crackdowning, the Defendant prepared a written statement to the effect that “the two male guests would have frighten and frightened to the president (B) and then frightened to the president (B).” In full view of the fact that the investigation agency stated to the same purport, and that the statement made by the investigation agency B to the investigation agency is consistent with this, this part of the facts charged is recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

B. Although the Defendant is deemed to have merely been an employee of the instant singing, the lower court’s sentence to reduce the fine amount of the summary order by taking this into account as appropriate, and considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances and result leading to the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, and other various sentencing conditions, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.