If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On August 14, 2017, the Defendant entered into an installment contract with the victim on the condition that the Defendant repaid the amount of KRW 15 million at the interest rate of 20.4% per annum over 48 months for the purpose of purchasing the said vehicle in the Seoul Western Center of the victim C Co., Ltd. located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The victim set up a mortgage of KRW 7.5 million for the said vehicle.

On February 21, 2018, the Defendant concealed the goods of the Defendant, which became the object of the victim’s right, and interfered with the exercise of the victim’s right to mortgage by making it impossible to confirm the location of the vehicle and deliver the vehicle by having the Defendant keep the said vehicle to F for the purpose of ensuring the Defendant’s obligation to the E, even though the Defendant unpaid the payment of the 600,000 won in installments and lost the benefit of time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of a vehicle photograph transmitted by F), investigation report (F and telephone content), investigation report (A debt-related G and telephone content), investigation report (Attachment of notarial document related to vehicles), investigation report (Attachment of notarial document related to vehicles), investigation report (G and secondary telephone content), investigation report (E and telephone content); investigation report (E and telephone content);

1. Application for a medium and long-term debate, terms and conditions of installment financing, original register of automobile registration, details of voluntary commencement of auction of automobiles, details of impossibility of delivery of automobiles, details of receipt compared to the plan, and application of the statute of notice of loss of time

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. A favorable circumstance, such as the fact that the defendant's erroneous recognition of the sentencing of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and reflects the defendant's wrong recognition, and the defendant provided another person with a mortgaged vehicle for the purpose of collateral security, thereby making it impossible to recover the victim's claim through the exercise of the security right. The defendant did not fully repay his/her obligations up to now, and his/her age and sexual behavior is committed in the past.