The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) Fraud, the Defendant, as the victim of the fraudulent crime by F, engaging in the so-called “motor vehicle tin” as a business, did not have the intention of deception or illegal acquisition, and the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Company”) still holds a loan claim against the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant did not have any pecuniary profit.

2) Regarding the obstruction of exercising the right, the Defendant visited the Hyundai Motor Agent on July 19, 201 and received and immediately transferred the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security to F on the same day after the purchase and sale contract was concluded. This is not an object which is the object of another person’s right, but is not an object which is the object of another person’s right.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles as to fraud 1) In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below's judgment as to the fact of fraud, the evidence, especially the witness D's statement at the court below, the defendant's statement at the court below's court, the suspect interrogation protocol, application for loan, certificate of employment, automobile registration register, investigation report (verification of the process of issuance of the certificate of employment), etc., the fact that the defendant purchased the vehicle and the defendant was expected to immediately deliver it to others, and the defendant did not have any ability or intent to repay the loan, can be sufficiently recognized by deceiving the employee in charge of loan of the victim company to pay the balance of the vehicle transaction to the Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. ( even if the victim company has a loan claim against the defendant, the defendant acquired property profits by the execution of the loan).2)