logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.08.21 2015노1706
강도상해등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant is a corporation of Aju Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Aju Capital”).

A) Although it was possible to anticipate the compulsory execution of a vehicle by receiving text messages on demand for the payment of vehicle installments, legal procedure advance notice, demand for delivery of vehicle, etc. from the Defendant, the Defendant did not notify the location of the vehicle in the Agnish as he refused to return the vehicle in the Agnish. This act constitutes the concealment of the vehicle and the intent of concealment is recognized. Therefore, the lower court’s judgment that acquitted the Defendant of obstruction of another’s exercise of right among the facts charged in the instant case was erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) In so doing, the Defendant’s imprisonment (three years and six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court is too un

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On August 24, 2013, the Defendant purchased “Li 30 Automobiles” in the used cars trading complex located in Ansan-si around August 24, 2013, and borrowed KRW 11.5 million from the victim Aju Capital to the purchase fund for the said automobiles, and around August 26, 2013, the Defendant registered the establishment of a mortgage with the mortgagee as the victim and the bond value as KRW 5.75 million.

Meanwhile, as the Defendant failed to pay an installment after September 2014, the victim sent text messages to the Defendant several times to urge the payment of installment from October 8, 2014 to November 28, 2014, and deliver the said vehicle provided as a security to recover the balance of the loan.

On February 2, 2014, the Defendant was a director of Cheongju-si M, Cheongju-si, which is the domicile of the Defendant on the resident registration card, and the O dormitory located in Cheongsung-si N, and the director again is a P around June 2014.

arrow