logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2015.12.16 2015고정96
권리행사방해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 24, 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 7.5 million from the office of Korea Social Services Korea Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., the victim Alhypha, which was 30,000,000, in the name of the purchase price of the 2007 class B B 3 vehicles, by means of equal installments of principal and interest for 36 months, and on May 29, 2013, the Defendant created a mortgage on the said vehicle with a claim amounting to KRW 7.5 million with respect to the victim to secure the loan.

Nevertheless, from October 2013, the Defendant avoided contact with the victim and concealed the said vehicle in a way that moved the said vehicle to an infertility.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the vehicle that is the object of the victim's mortgage, thereby hindering the victim's exercise of rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Each investigation report (Attachment of vehicle photographs related to the case and reporting on telephone conversations of a person in charge of loans);

1. A copy of the agreement on loans for purchasing secondhand cars;

1. A copy of the register of motor vehicles [the defendant started to pay the principal and interest of the loan from the third time on September 5, 2013 and thereafter avoided contact with the victim from October 2013 (the defendant did not reside at his/her registered domicile; however, the defendant did not have any contact with the defendant that postal items, such as the notice of the fine for negligence concerning the above vehicle, are served at his/her domicile from the defendant's father D, but did not confirm at all about this.

() From May 2014 to November 2014, the transferee of the victim’s credit continued to park the said vehicle in the vicinity of the E’s office, which is the place of the said vehicle, continuously from around November 2014, following the victim’s complaint by the Defendant. Considering these circumstances, the Defendant may be deemed to have concealed the said vehicle, and the Defendant may be deemed to have had intention to conceal the vehicle, which is the object of the Convention on Dunae Mortgage, to the extent that there was an intention

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

1. Selection of fines;

1. Article 70 of the Criminal Act for the Detention of Labor House Head.

arrow