The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing)

A. In light of the legal principles, Defendant’s act does not constitute “loan” under the Act on Registration of Loan Business, etc. and Protection of Financial Users, and thus cannot be punished as a violation of the said Act.

B. The lower court’s punishment (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. A. An ex officio judgment prosecutor filed an application for the amendment to a bill of indictment with the content of the facts charged No. 1-B as stated below, and this Court permitted this part of the judgment, and thus, this part of the judgment of the court below should be reversed. The court below held that this part of the judgment of the court below and the remainder are in the relation of a single crime (criminal No. 1-A) or concurrent crimes (criminal facts No. 2).

In light of the above, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in its entirety.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the above legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

B. Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Act on the Registration of Loan Business, Etc. and Protection of Financial Users (hereinafter “Loan Business Act”) regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the legal doctrine includes “delivery of money by means of bill discount transfer security or by other similar means” within the scope of “loan prior to the payment.”

According to evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant paid the price of goods or taxes with a credit card from a person who wants to obtain a loan to him/her, and delivered the amount equivalent to 89% of the settlement amount to him/her in cash, the credit card company paid the remainder of the settlement amount less than the credit card commission (3%) to the credit card store, and the above credit card store remitted the amount excluding the certain fee (6% according to the defendant's assertion) from the credit card price received from the credit card company to the account designated by the defendant.