On August 20, 2014, the Defendant purchased modern New B-V-P-P-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S

Nevertheless, around February 2015, the Defendant borrowed KRW 7,00,000 from G to G in a place where it is impossible to know that it violated the aforementioned duties, and thereafter transferred the said car to it as security, thereby obtaining property benefits equivalent to KRW 7,000,000, and suffered damages equivalent to KRW 25,000,000 from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a contract certificate, register of automobiles, decision on auction of automobiles, and protocol of impossibility of delivery of automobiles;

1. Since the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act as to the facts constituting an offense substantial injury that has not been restored to the reason for sentencing under Article 355(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence of imprisonment like the order shall be imposed.