Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

Around June 4, 2013, the Defendant purchased Crane car at the Hyundai Motor Agent’s counter B of Changwon-si, and received a loan of KRW 26,500,000 from the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., and offered the said car as security, despite having offered the victim company a collateral security right of KRW 26,50,000 with respect to the said car, the Defendant offered the said car as security by borrowing KRW 15,00,000 from a person who was unable to know his name before the Changwon University located in the counter-si of Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Seoul.

Accordingly, the Defendant concealed the location of the car owned by the Defendant, which was the object of the victim company's right, so that the Defendant interfered with the rights of the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each investigation report (as to attachment of check-up to the C mandatory insurance, and as to contact with the insured);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint (including accompanying documents);

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 323 of the Selection of Punishment Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the Defendant, while purchasing a new vehicle, provided the victim with a mortgage on the vehicle and then provided it as a security to another person despite having received a loan, thereby hindering the exercise of the victim’s rights, and thus, the case is not easy.

It seems that the damage has not been completely recovered, and the location of the vehicle has not been grasped at all.

However, the defendant reflects his fault in depth.

After the vehicle mortgage loan, it seems that the loan is normally paid for about six months, and as the business is in a crisis due to business failure, it appears that this case was reached in order to provide funds as security, and there was no intention to distribute the vehicle as soon as possible from the beginning.