A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2013, the Defendant purchased the EBelgium car free trade zone located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and received a loan of KRW 18,800,000 from the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., and issued a mortgage on the said car free trade zone to the victim on April 13, 2013.

However, at around that time, the Defendant received three million won from the person who was not a siren in the name of the rental car operator in Incheon Franchis, and did not verify all the personal information of the person who was not the name, the name of the business, and contact information of the person who was not the name, thereby preventing the victim from executing the mortgage.

Ultimately, the Defendant concealed the car amount owned by the Defendant, which was the object of the victim’s rights, and obstructed the victim’s exercise of rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of the provisions of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the register of automobiles to modern Capitals;

1. Article 323 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. In light of the fact that the vehicle purchased with the loan from the person who suffered damage from the reason for imposing the alternative sentence of imprisonment with prison labor is not good in the nature of the crime by promptly delivering the vehicle to the person without the name and obstructing the exercise of the mortgage, and the failure to recover damage, the criminal liability shall be imposed, but the defendant reflects his mistake, and the defense counsel has no record of punishment for the same crime on August 24, 2017, who was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for four years (Seoul Western District Court 2017 High Court 2017 High Court 92) due to robbery rape, etc., and the circumstance that should consider equality with the case where the defendant rendered a judgment together with the case on August 24, 2017 should also be considered as the reason for sentencing. However, on December 28, 2006 between the above case and the crime in this case, the defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for robbery as a crime of robbery and the case becomes final and conclusive on March 30, 20007.