beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) of the original judgment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. We examine ex officio in order to clarify the facts stated in the judgment of the court below on whether the defendant's act of offering excavations secured by a mortgage to I as security constitutes concealment of the crime of interference with the exercise of rights (the defendant submitted the statement of reasons for appeal to the effect that he did not conceal excavations, but withdrawn them thereafter). Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are acknowledged:
① Around December 2013, the Defendant transferred five possessions to I for the purpose of securing the right to lease and collateral, but the Defendant stated to the effect that T was on the part of the victim.
② On March 26, 2014 and May 24, 2014, the Defendant stated to the effect that, upon undergoing an investigation by each police station, he/she was placed in a leased business site, he/she was unable to inform the leased business operator of the location because he/she received the leased business income of the leased business, he/she could pay the outstanding amount to the victim. If he/she is notified of the location of the excavated machine, he/she could not be informed of the location.
③ On September 17, 2014, the Defendant stated that he was investigated by the prosecution, but he was unable to speak at the location, but he was given a lease of the sofaculation, and reversed this, and stated that I provided it as security, but the location of the sofacing season cannot be known.
④ The number of a vehicle was changed to one of the excavation machines, while the number of a vehicle was lost to two.
In full view of the above facts of recognition, the defendant belongs to the victim for several months, did not notify the location of the excavation season, and the three excavations could not be identified with the number plate, and the defendant's identity could not be identified.