Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On August 7, 2018, the defendant left as a consignee of the victim's DNA vehicle owned by the victim B, which was offered by the victim B in order to scrap the vehicle before Michuhol-gu, Incheon, and has been ordered to purchase at KRW 2 million, and has destroyed the contract after sunset due to the change of the vehicle structure that had already been known after examining the vehicle structure at the time of the contract, the situation where the vehicle owned by the victim was stored in the situation where the victim was stored. However, even though the defendant reversed the contract due to the change of the depth on the part of the defendant, the victim did not return the deposit cost, oil value, etc. while demanding the return.

8. On August 8 and February 2 of the same month, the vehicle was parked and sent to the designated vehicle's vehicle's address on two occasions, and the vehicle was not notified of the vehicle's parking site despite the vehicle's request for return, but rejected the vehicle's return without good cause by driving at a quantity of 300 km and accompanying the vehicle.

Accordingly, the Defendant refused to return the vehicle in custody of the victim without justifiable reasons.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning B;

1. B accusation;

1. Additional data to be submitted (the details of currencies and messages);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation report (the submission of photographs on B/L to the complainant);

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the sentencing of Article 32(1)3 and Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Litigation, etc. of Application for Compensation (the scope of Defendant’s liability for compensation is unclear and thus, it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in criminal proceedings): The fact that the application did not reach an agreement with the victim, and there was no effort to recover damage, including property and criminal records.