The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defense counsel;

A. Under the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the owner of B cargo vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and the person who has created a right to collateral security, who is a branch company, is newcheon Logistics Co., Ltd. and the Defendant is not the owner of the instant vehicle.

Nevertheless, by finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “self-owned goods” in the crime of obstruction of exercise of rights, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant recognized the error of unfair sentencing and against it, the Defendant did not deliver the instant vehicle to maintain his livelihood even after receiving a demand to deliver the vehicle by installment payment from the victim non-NN Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) on November 14, 2016, and the Defendant delivered the instant vehicle to the victim company on November 14, 2016 and expressed his intent that the victim company would not want the Defendant’s punishment in the current public sale procedure is in progress and the party trial, the lower court’s sentence that sentenced the Defendant for eight months is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the owner of the instant vehicle.

On August 28, 2014, the Defendant took out a loan of KRW 93,00,000 from the victim company at the A-to-si office located in Pyeongtaek-si, Young-do, 439-1, and on September 12, 2014, the Defendant created a right to collateral security with the victim company as a mortgagee on the instant vehicle.

On April 4, 2016, the Defendant received an order from the Suwon District Court to deliver the instant vehicle from the Defendant on April 4, 2016 to execute the installment payment of KRW 90,782,556, which was impossible to repay the installment loan from around September 2015, and subsequently concealed the said vehicle without complying with the order, even though the Defendant requested the delivery of the instant vehicle.

The defendant has the right to another person.