The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A A A A with a fine of KRW 2 million, Defendant B with a fine of KRW 1 million, and Defendant C.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the commission that the Defendants lent money to customers and let customers open the cell phone and received from the mobile phone agencies, etc. constitutes interest as set forth in the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users (hereinafter “Credit Business Act”), but the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles on this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is merely a consideration for attracting customers.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was operated by Defendant A as “G” in Busan Southern-gu F and 1907, and Defendant B and C served as an employee in “G”.

Where a credit service provider grants a loan to an individual, the interest rate shall not exceed 39/100 per annum.

Nevertheless, Defendants B and C conspired to attract customers by advertising “G” with the phrase “small loan company specialized in microcredit” on the Internet B, etc., and loaned KRW 1.5 million to H, who visited the said advertisement at the Office of “G” on November 4, 2013 and received KRW 30,000 per annum 127% interest per annum by having H receive interest from 101 persons including H, including the mobile phone opening and opening a mobile phone and receiving KRW 261,00 per annum from J to 4 March 2014, by having H receive KRW 120,920,000 in total from 10,000,000 to 101 persons including H, including the mobile phone opening and opening a mobile phone and receiving 30,000 won for 50,000 won per annum.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the money or substitute paid as consideration for the use of money or other substitutes.