All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant A1’s organization of a criminal organization, the main purpose of the criminal organization organized by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant organization”) is registration of lending business, etc., which is “a imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine not exceeding 30 million won,” and acts prohibited by Article 19(2)3 of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users (hereinafter “Loan Business Act”), and thus, it does not constitute “organization with a view to committing a crime corresponding to imprisonment for a maximum term of not less than four years” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act.

In addition, there is no fact that the Defendant conspireds with the members of the instant organization except J, “a crime punishable by imprisonment with prison labor for more than four years.”

② As to the violation of the law of lending business due to the receipt of interest exceeding the limited interest rate, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant actually received the interest of the agreement exceeding the limited interest rate at the due date for payment of the entire amount loaned as in the table of separate crimes (1).

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (a three-year imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C (unfair sentencing)’s punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, additional collection, observation of protection, community service time 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts 1) In relation to the co-offenders who jointly process at least two persons related to the establishment of the organization of a criminal organization, the conspiracy is not required under law, but is a combination of two or more persons to jointly process a crime and realize the crime.

Although there was no parent process in the whole, there was no parent process.

In addition, Article 19(1)1 of the Loan Business Act provides that a public offering relationship is established if a combination of doctors is made in a successive or secret manner between several persons (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do3483, Nov. 10, 200, etc.).