The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is true that the defendant has received a loan from the Dispute Settlement Co., Ltd. and delivered the vehicle to F, or because the address of the above lending company is clear, the defendant's delivery of the vehicle does not constitute concealment as referred to in the obstruction of the exercise of rights because the location of the vehicle is not clear.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. On September 16, 2013, the Defendant entered into a loan agreement with the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. and received a loan of KRW 17,100,000 from the Plaintiff, and affixed the following seal.

9. Around 17. Around 17.m., the Defendant-owned C SPP sets up a right to collateral security with a victim as a person with a lower right and with a bond value of KRW 17,100,000.

Nevertheless, at the end of March 2014, the Defendant obtained a loan from the E-Business Office located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Metropolitan Government) and made it difficult for the Defendant to exercise the right to collateral security by making the said E-Business President F to know its location.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed his own property, which was the object of the right to collateral security of the victim, and obstructed the victim's exercise of rights.

3. We examine the misapprehension of legal principles on determination.

The obstruction of exercise of right shall be established by interference with the exercise of another person's right by taking, concealing, or destroying special media records, such as his/her own property or electronic records which are the object of possession or right

Here, the term "discidation" means that it is impossible or considerably difficult to detect the location of one's own goods, etc. which is the object of possession or right of another person.

According to the evidence of this case, including the statement of the witness F and the video of the vehicle photograph, the defendant, after having settled the instant vehicle with the Hyundai Ildle Development Bank, has received a loan of KRW 2 million, KRW 1 million, and KRW 2 million from the LAE, respectively, and the LAE also has a bond value on October 18, 2013.