The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of violating the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users, despite the fact that the Defendant borrowed 3% of monthly interest rate and 49% per annum from the Defendant, and received the principal and interest accordingly, and did not have received any interest exceeding this, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the fact that the lower court erred and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) Although there is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act that the defendant sent text messages as stated in the facts charged, this does not send letters contingently because the debtor's failure to repay his/her loans, and it does not send letters repeatedly, but does not send letters repeatedly, and even if the contents of letters are not to the extent that the debtor's apprehensions is not induced, the court below convicted the defendant differently by misunderstanding the facts that affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 1.2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Fact-finding. (1) We examine the fact that there is a violation of the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users, the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, and the following circumstances acknowledged thereby. In other words, the defendant, who is a credit service provider, extended a loan of KRW 25 million to the debtor on January 21, 2010 and received interest from the debtor on April 13, 2010. The defendant, a loan of KRW 25 million again with the debtor on April 13, 201, agreed to receive KRW 150,000 as principal and interest every day (68.4% if this is calculated as annual interest rate) for 200 days, and it appears that the debtor paid KRW 9.4 million each day after deducting interest, etc. which was not received from the borrower on January 21, 2010. However, the defendant was paid KRW 20 million between the debtor and the debtor on April 13, 2010.