beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The injured party D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) in the facts charged of the instant case entered into a contract for the construction of a new neighborhood living facility of KRW 11.1 billion in the construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the executory company E and the Northern-gu two lots (hereinafter “instant lots”) around October 8, 2008, and suspended the construction on August 2009, while performing the construction work, and the Defendant is a company exercising the right of retention from around March 2012. The Defendant is the actual operator of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) who completed the construction of the said new building (hereinafter “instant building”) with the proceeds of KRW 7640,000,000,000 for the public sale goods around August 8, 2014.
On November 10, 2014, the victim company received a provisional disposition prohibiting the obstruction of lien against the limited liability company G in the Daegu District Court Port Branch branch on November 10, 2014, and the defendant filed an objection and received a provisional disposition approval by the same court as 2014Kahap82 on February 16, 2015.
At around 11:00 on March 19, 2015, the Defendant: (a) visited the scene to exercise the right of retention; (b) visited the victim’s employees in the north-gu F building in the north-gu, North Korea; (c) and (d) let the victim’s employees take the breath of the H and forced them into force; and (d) around 14:00 on the same day, the Defendant arbitrarily cut out one container owned by the victim’s company which is kept in the building to exercise the right of retention from the victim’s company, using the truck, and moved to I located in the North-gu, North-gu, North Korea.
Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the exercise of the right of retention by the victim company by force.
2. Determination
A. According to the records on the victim company’s waiver of the right of retention and the legal nature of possession 1) The victim company’s existence of the right of retention and the records on the waiver of the right of retention are as follows: (a) the victim company loaned construction cost around July 2008 to quasi-
The letter of waiver of the right of retention has been issued to the E and corporation on July 30, 2008.