When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On September 7, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million from the victim C at the D Loan Office operated by the victim C in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and as security, transferred approximately KRW 662,730,000, the market price of the Defendant owned by the Defendant, and approximately KRW 8,780,00 to the victim.

On October 2012, the Defendant had G, an employee of the Defendant, his employee at the F Logistics Storage Center located in Ma, G, the Defendant brought about about approximately 3,011 of the market price of 40 million won among the above collateral held in his custody.

Accordingly, the defendant had G take the goods of the defendant, which is the object of the victim's right, and interfered with the victim's exercise of right.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The police statement of H;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (attached to data submitted by e-mail of a suspect, and reporting on confirmation of telephone call);

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 323 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In addition, even though the Defendant had been subject to punishment several times under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is difficult to find out the opening of the instant crime, such as partially denying the fact of the crime, but having been absent twice on the trial date.

The sentence is imposed as ordered in consideration of all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.