A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 20, 2012, the Defendant purchased a B SP car at a place no domicile and borrowed 25,400,000 won from the victim C Co., Ltd. for purchase and set up a mortgage on the said car in the name of the victimized Co., Ltd. as security.

Nevertheless, on March 2014, the Defendant borrowed 6 million won from a non-name credit service provider on condition of 6 months of repayment and 300,000 won per interest month to a location where the address is unknown, and provided the said car as security, thereby hindering the exercise of the rights of the victim company by concealing the goods of the Defendant, which became the object of the rights of the victim company, and thereby obstructing the exercise of rights by the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A report on investigation (the sequence 7 in list of evidence);

1. An application form for a test mark, an automobile register, or the register of automobiles;

1. Notice of the transfer of claims, the fact of entrustment, the contract for asset acquisition and transfer of assets, and the certification of contents;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to unmanned control materials, notification disposition materials, and mandatory insurance data;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 323 (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (hereinafter “the grounds for the remaining sentence”), which is favorable to the defendant;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for probation and community service order prevents the exercise of the rights of the victim company by borrowing money from the credit service provider and delivering the said vehicle as security even though the defendant had received a loan from the victim company and set up a mortgage on the said vehicle in the name of the victim company as a security, and the above loan was not paid in full. The crime of this case prevents the victim company from exercising the rights by borrowing the money from the credit service provider and delivering the said vehicle as security. The crime of this case is not good, the amount of installments of the above vehicle that the defendant has not paid to the victim company exceeds 16 million won, and the