The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant paid F the F in misunderstanding of facts KRW 46 million as interest for the instant loan amount of KRW 60 million before and after filing a complaint.

B. The lower court’s sentence (two million won of fine) is too unlimited and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Article 3 subparag. 2 of the Political Funds Act provides that the free lending of money, goods, or facilities shall be deemed as donation. Here, the lending of money, goods, etc. refers to the lending without the contribution of the cost for the use of money, goods, etc., so whether the lending of money, goods, etc. is free of charge or not should be determined based on whether the said lending is liable

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3383 Decided November 15, 2007). Although the Defendant paid the F 46 million won interest from F before and after the F’s accusation, the Defendant paid the F 46 million won interest.

Even in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted evidence, namely, that the Defendant did not prepare a loan certificate or agreed to pay interest at the time of borrowing money from F, the Defendant stated that F was given a free loan from F by the investigative agency; and that the Defendant was accused of the complaint from F on March 31, 2014; and that the Defendant did not have paid interest or urged payment of interest from F by the date four years have elapsed since the date of borrowing money, the instant charges that the Defendant received a free loan from F are sufficiently proven.

After that, even if F is deemed to have reached an agreement including interest in the process of concluding the agreement after the complaint of this case, it does not affect the judgment on the existence of a crime because it is merely an circumstance after the crime.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing