On February 5, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Southern District Court on February 5, 2014 and completed the enforcement of the sentence at the Seoul Southern District Court on October 5, 2014.

1. 2017 Highest 690

A. On June 7, 2017, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (Non-licenseless Driving) driven Cbe-Korean-style cruise car without a driver’s license in the section of approximately 80km from the 80km-dong branch office of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office (Seoul District Public Prosecutor’s Office) located within the 306 km-ro, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, the 80km-dong branch office of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office (Seoul District Public Prosecutor’s Office).

B. On July 30, 2017, the Defendant damaged the property of the victim by finding the victim E, who is a main body located in Guri-si, in a drunken state, around 22:50 on the 30th day of July 30, 2017, and putting the victim a dangerous object block (18cm wide, 16cm long), which is a dangerous object, breaking the glass window, and displaying the window of the crime prevention, thereby damaging the equipment of the victim so that the repair cost can be KRW 3.50,00.

2. 2018 high group 70

A. On January 2017, the Defendant: (a) purchased 1,00,000 won from the office of used cars sales stores G, located in the Seocho-si, the Seocho-si, the Defendant: (b) agreed to borrow 10,000,000 won from the Victim Capital Co., Ltd. to repay the loan by equal repayment of principal and interest for 314,510 won each month; and (c) set up a collateral security in the name of the victimized Company with respect to the said vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the loan principle for the above vehicle at all, and the Defendant did not return it even upon receiving a request from the victimized Company for delivery of the above van around March 7, 2017, even though it did not return it.

9. Around 27.27. Around the 27.m., the Gangwon-do fleet-gun I transferred the said vehicle to K that operates the “J Hallgpo” for the purpose of securing the claim and the victim’s location cannot be known.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the above vehicle owned by the defendant, which was the object of the victim company's security, and obstructed the victim company's exercise of rights.