The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, each of the defendants B.

(b).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s appeal 1) misunderstanding of the facts as to the registration of loan business and violation of the Act on the Protection of Financial Users, and misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant A received a final and conclusive verdict of innocence in the same case as to the same violation of the Act on the Registration of Loan Business and the Protection of Financial Users (hereinafter “Loan Business Act”).

In addition, Defendant A, at the request of Defendant B, only attempted to engage in the loan business of the above B, and there is no fact that Defendant A acted in collusion.

2) There is no fact that Defendant A embezzled the above amount on the grounds that Defendant A did not recover a loan from the lender H with respect to the embezzlement of 1 of the attached Table 21 of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below as to the negligence of occupational embezzlement.

3) Since a considerable portion of the amount obtained by deceit as stated in the attached Table 3 of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below is used to fully repay the loans to the lender who borrowed the name of the defendant A, there is no intention to commit fraud.

4) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s appeal 1) In relation to the fact that Defendant B’s violation of the law on loan business, the loans listed in the above order are merely a renewal of documents by using the balance of the existing loan as the principal and interest, not the actual loan, with regard to Nos. 126, 238, 295 of the annexed crime List 1 in the judgment of the court below, which was erroneous as to the fact that Defendant B’s violation of the law on loan business. 2) The judgment of the court below’s unfair sentencing (6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended sentence) is unreasonable

2. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal

A. As to the grounds for appeal regarding the violation of the loan business law, the first ground for appeal by the Defendant regarding the violation of the loan business law should be examined as to the judgment of acquittal. The first ground for appeal by the Defendant regarding the violation of the loan business law should be examined as the allegation of acquittal due to the existence of final

First of all, the prosecution against Defendant A's violation of the loan business law is instituted.