beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.
However, the above sentence shall be executed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On April 28, 2008, the Defendant entered into a credit transaction agreement with the victim (B, president C) at the Dog-dong Seoul Metropolitan Government 3 Enterprise Bank branch on April 28, 2008 as “the name of the account: The loan of funds for small and medium enterprise facilities, the expiration date of the loan: April 28, 2016; the amount of credit (limit): KRW 00 million; and the purpose of funds use: The Defendant received a loan of KRW 152 million from the said bank on the same day.
On April 13, 2007, the Defendant changed the registration of the establishment of the first place of the Incheon District Court, No. 5174, the Industrial Bank of Korea, No. 517, No. 60624 on April 28, 2008, “the registration of the establishment of the first place of the establishment of the factory,” which was completed with respect to No. 511 on the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor to the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor to the 5th floor of the 5th floor of the 5th floor, Hancheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, a factory building owned by the Defendant, into the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring places of the factory, “CHAMIES CNCRM/C” (No. 627).
In addition, the Defendant additionally completed the “registration of establishment of a mortgage on the second priority place of No. 60626 of April 28, 2008 at the same court which made the maximum amount of claims KRW 180,000,000,000, the debtor, the defendant, and the Industrial Bank of Korea of the mortgagee,” and the said machinery was also listed as a list of Article 7 of the same Act.
In the event of establishing a mortgage under the former Factory Mortgage Act (Act No. 6627), the effect of the mortgage established by the owner of the factory on the building belonging to the factory is limited to the public goods of the machinery, apparatus, and other factories installed in that building. Thus, the above machinery has a duty not to dispose of the machinery, which is a collateral, without the consent of the mortgagee, so that the value of the collateral is not lost.
Nevertheless, the defendant violated his duties, and the name of January 2009 is known.