Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five months, and the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who receives loan-related documents, etc. from a lending company on behalf of the lending applicant after counseling with the lending applicant online, and operates a lending brokerage company that receives fees from the lending company when the loan is completed.

In the case of “work-based credit loans” handled by savings banks and loan companies, the Defendant, using the fact that the employment certificate and income-related evidential data are not strict compared to other loans when the loan examination is conducted, provided personal credit rating to those who are not able to borrow a financial institution in a normal way due to no incomeless, and provided false workplace information and benefits to those who are not able to borrow a financial institution in a normal way, and ordered the loan applicants to speak that they are not in a false workplace at the time of the loan examination by ordering the loan applicants to make false statements.

Accordingly, the recruitment of loan applicants, such as D, play a role in recruiting loan applicants and introducing them to the defendant, and the defendant ordered the loan applicants to answer during the process of receiving a loan review telephone from a financial institution, as if the loan applicants work for convenience stores, etc., it will be in charge of overall management of loan brokerage business by providing information on the convenience stores, etc. around the address of loan applicants. According to the above role, D received some of the loans that the loan applicants received from the loan applicants as a fee from the loan companies, and the defendant received the fee from the loan companies.

According to the above public offering, D recruited E, the applicant for the loan, and introduced it to the Defendant, and the Defendant ordered the Defendant to make a statement at the time of the loan examination as if he were to work for “F convenience store” in the absence of any occupation, and received a certain amount of benefits every month.

Since then, E, together with D, on January 27, 2015.