권리행사방해
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
1. The summary of the facts charged is the representative director of a stock company B for the purpose of displaying sculptures, etc., and around August 201, the Defendant entered into an operation agreement with C, and planned lighting exhibitions, art group performances, dancing film festivals, and contact sets in LED U.S., but the funds were insufficient, on August 30, 201, borrowed KRW 50 million in total from the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) twice from the victim E (hereinafter “E”), and provided KRW 17,00,000 in exhibitions, such as Article 42, owned by B, as collateral, to secure the loan obligation.
On February 13, 2012, the victim E entered into a contract with F Co., Ltd. to deposit the sculptures provided as security by the Defendant without compensation, and stored the above exhibition sculptures in the Chungcheongnam-gun G of Chungcheongnam-gun.
around July 2012, the Defendant arbitrarily possessed sculptures G in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and used them for H events from August 3, 2012 to August 26, 2012, and continued to exhibit them for I events from November 1, 2012 to December 201, 2012.
Accordingly, the defendant had his own property, which is the object of the victim's right, arbitrarily and interfered with the victim's exercise of right.
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, including the witness J and K’s legal statement, the Defendant provided the sculpture as collateral while borrowing money from E, and the Defendant continued possession and management of the sculpture. However, after the completion of the “D” exercise, the Defendant left the sculpture as it was, E was an employee of E.
K may recognize the fact that K has been dispatched to the scene of the GG event on November 2012 and confirmed the number of visitors.
As above, the right of possession and management of the sculptures under the contract lies in the defendant, and the defendant left the place of custody by neglecting the sculptures.