However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 22, 2016, the Defendant purchased sports cargo vehicles at B Co., Ltd. and agreed to borrow KRW 24.4 million from the victim BNK Capital Co., Ltd. to repay them equally over 72 months in order to pay the price. On August 24, 2016, the victim company established a mortgage on the above cargo vehicle at the security of the above loan amounting to KRW 17,80,000.

On February 2017, the Defendant borrowed money from the pawnegpo where it is impossible to know the trade name in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City), and offered the said car as security without paying all the above loans.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the location of the above cargo vehicle and obstructed the victim's exercise of rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of statutes on non-delivery of motor vehicles, the motor vehicle registration ledger, and the maximum delivery of mortgaged motor vehicles;

1. Article 323 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 323 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service Order;

1. Type 1 (Obstruction of Exercise of Rights) basic area (from June to one year) (no person who has any special sentencing factors) shall interfere with the exercise of the right to recommend punishment on the sentencing guidelines;

2. Taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the location of the vehicle owned by the Defendant was not identified and that the damage to the victimized company was not recovered, the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided the mistake in depth, the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and the fact that some of the loan principal appears to have been repaid, together with the consideration of the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the location of the vehicle owned by the Defendant was not identified and that the damage was not recovered, and the punishment as set forth in the Disposition