The punishment of the accused shall be determined by six months of imprisonment.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On November 13, 2014, the Defendant, as the representative director of C, obtained a loan of KRW 100 million from the Victim Gwangju Bank at the Hannam-dong Busan District Financial Center, Gwangju District, Gwangju District, and set up a collateral security right of KRW 120 million against the creditor as to the land, buildings, machinery, and equipment of the Nam Young-gun, Seoul District, Inc., which are owned by C as the creditor.

On January 2016, the Defendant: (a) sold one half of the machinery and instruments that established a collateral security (HM-1000) and one half of the machinery and instruments (HM-1300), which were the subject of the victim’s rights, in a medium machinery and equipment purchaser with no knowledge of the trade name in the vicinity of Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter referred to as “SM-1300”); and (b) concealed two of the machinery and instruments that were the subject of the victim’s rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of E;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A certificate of all registered matters;

1. A written agreement on collateral security and a statement of evaluation of machinery and tools;

1. A credit transaction agreement [the defendant has sold the above machinery and instruments two points without knowing the fact that the right to collateral security was established in the name of the victim with respect to the above machinery and instruments two points;

However, according to each evidence of the judgment, it is recognized that the agreement between C and the victim of the right to collateral security is accompanied by a detailed statement of evaluation of machinery and instruments, including two points of the above agreement of collateral security and the official seal of the representative director of C is affixed thereto. The above evaluation statement was provided by C, the victim was a company with general loan to C, and the above loan was in charge at the lower point of the damaged party. In such a case, it is generally accepted that the debtor was provided with the real estate other than the real estate owned by the debtor as collateral, and that the defendant was seeking to provide the above machinery and instruments as collateral prior to the above loan by a new bank prior to the defendant India, and even based on the defendant's statement, the defendant is also the defendant.