The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Regarding the fact-misunderstanding (1) as to the registration of lending business, etc., the violation of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users, and the violation of the Act on Financial Business Specializing in Credit, a transaction listed in the attached Table 1 of the crime List as stated in the judgment of the court below is likely to include a normal transaction, not a false one, and the details which

(2) As to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, 7 of the access media listed in Schedule 2 of the List of Crimes in the judgment of the court below was acquired by GS rather than the defendant, and the defendant was merely keeping the same.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the court below on the violation of the Act on the Registration of Loan Business and the Protection of Financial Users and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below. In other words, the defendant confirmed the crime list, etc., and led the defendant to the purport that all of the charges are recognized. In light of the circumstances of confession statement, etc., the confession made by the defendant at the prosecutor's office and the court below in light of the circumstance of confession statement, etc., there is credibility. Further, the defendant was registered as a broker through Brer by receiving a nominal lender through Brer and filed a false credit card merchant and kept the credit card settlement machine upon receiving H's request for credit card approval payment, and it seems that the member store traded by the accomplice including the defendant et al. was not engaged in normal business activities except for "credit card tin'." In full view of the following circumstances, the defendant conspired with H et al., and the defendant deducted the amount of loan fee as in attached Form 1.