A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On July 9, 2015, the Defendant purchased the victim KB Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Company”) located in Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 308 (hereinafter “victim Company”) at the branch office south of Gangnam-gu, and agreed to receive the 39 million won loan from the victim company and pay the 1,419,744 won per month including interest for 36 months, and to repay the 1,950,000 won per month to the victim company including interest. The Defendant set up a mortgage over the above vehicle at around the 10th of the same month.

Nevertheless, on April 2016, the Defendant borrowed KRW 5 million from D, the Defendant’s seat in Gangnam-gu apartment near Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and delivered the said car as security for the above borrowed money to D, thereby preventing the victim from confirming the location of the said car.

Accordingly, the defendant, who was the object of the mortgage of the victim company, concealed the car BNH330 car owned by the defendant, thereby hindering the victim company's exercise of rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. E statements;

1. Application for medium and high debate, certificate of debt balance, decision on voluntary commencement of auction by motor vehicles, application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the Motor Vehicle Registration Register;

1. Article 323 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order was that the Defendant borrowed a vehicle from the victim company to purchase the vehicle as installment financing and set up a mortgage on the vehicle as collateral, and then borrowed the money from the third party while the installment payment was delayed and delivered the vehicle as collateral and concealed the vehicle. Thus, there is no possibility of criticism because it is against trust in trade.

At the time, the defendant has already demanded the payment of installments from the victim company as well as the vehicle to exercise the security right.