logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.10.16 2014고단456
권리행사방해등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 12, 2010, the Defendant: (a) purchased Epis vehicles in the name of the said company at the D office located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon; (b) agreed to borrow KRW 32,700,000 as the purchase price for vehicles from the said company in the name of the said company; and (c) agreed to pay KRW 736,510 each month in installments for 60 months from the said company; and (d) set up a mortgage on the said vehicle at KRW 16,40,000 for the said vehicle.

However, on September 4, 2013, the Defendant did not pay only KRW 23,746,260 for 32 installments of the vehicle until June 20, 2013 and did not pay the remainder of KRW 17,797,484, and the Defendant requested the victim to return the vehicle at issue, which was the object of the right to exercise the right to exercise the mortgage, but the Defendant refused it, and immediately thereafter obstructed the victim’s exercise of the right by concealing the vehicle by transferring the vehicle to a bondholder on the name of the police officer on September 2013.

The defendant of "2014 Highest 1532" was a person who operated "G Co., Ltd." in Daejeon Tae-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

1. On October 16, 2012, the Defendant loaned KRW 20 million to the victim at the “J” office operated by the victim I located in Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, and the victim’s KRW 20 million.

After one month, it is believed that the funds can be repaid in trust.

‘Falsely speaking to the effect that ‘’ was false.

However, the above company, which had been operated by the defendant at the time, was very difficult since around 2009, and since 2011, there was no intention or ability to repay the above amount even if it borrowed the amount from the victim because of the fact that there was a debt equivalent to KRW 200 million in personal at the time of this case. However, the real estate in the name of the defendant is not worth being able to pay the amount because of the establishment of a collateral security right, etc., the real estate in the name of the defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay it.

The Defendant is the victim.

arrow