The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants were not aware of the facts charged that intimidation the victim and let him sign the loan certificate, and there was no intention of coercion.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 5 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The Defendants alleged that they were identical to the grounds for appeal in the original judgment, and the lower court rejected the above assertion by stating in detail the Defendant’s assertion and its decision.

Examining records in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is justified, and the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. The Defendants appear to have committed a crime on a planned basis, by submitting an application for provisional seizure of the loan certificate submitted by forcing the victims to attach it to the application form for provisional seizure of the victim’s residence apartment without delay, and there are no new circumstances or special changes in circumstances that may be reflected in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and further considering various sentencing conditions stated in the record, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. Thus, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.