The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 32(6) and (1) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Act”), Article 5(13 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies and Article 32(6)13 of the Act on the Registration of Loan Business, etc. and the Protection of Financial Users should be tried and sentenced separately from other crimes. However, it is reasonable to view that the provisions of separate review and sentence under Article 32(6) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies apply only to cases where the defendant is subject to examination of eligibility under Article 32(1) of the same Act.

Therefore, even according to the record, there is no evidence to view that the defendant constitutes subject to examination of eligibility under Article 32(1) of the Act on the Management of Financial Services and Capital Markets. Therefore, it is justifiable that the court below did not separately examine and decide on the defendant's registration of loan business, etc. and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users from among the facts charged in this case and decide on

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on Article 32(6) of the Act on the Management of Financial Companies.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.