The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the statements of the obligor who borrowed money from the Defendant (misunderstanding of the facts), the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant was sufficiently recognized as a business of lending money, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts.

2. In full view of the following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone sufficient proof that the defendant was engaged in the lending business.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant for the same reason is justifiable, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

1) (1) The testimony at the court of the case of M in which the Defendant is aware of the fact that the Defendant lent money to I, J, K, and L and received interest from K is not believed in light of the following: (a) the testimony at the court of the case of M is made by the Defendant that I, J, K, and L does not know that L is K; and (b) in the case of J and K, a statement that there was no monetary transaction with the Defendant and submitted it to this court.

② In addition, M made a complaint against the Defendant under the suspicion of running a loan business without registration. In the above case, M was also ordered to make a decision without suspicion on the ground that the Defendant did not lend money to the Defendant.

2) L was aware of the person operating the Defendant’s fraternity in the court of the first instance, and there was a 2 million won loaned once every five years before L was 5 years.

was stated.

I and N have borrowed money of KRW 2 million from each of the Defendant in the court of the first instance, with the knowledge that the Defendant had sold the land at the time and had the Defendant borrow money from the Defendant by introducing I necessary money, and the Defendant did not have to lend money at a high interest rate to others.

Each of the witnesses who are present at the court of the first instance.