1. The defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding three million won;

2. Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won.

Punishment of the crime

On July 7, 2014, the Defendant purchased E mining search machine in the name of F Co., Ltd. operated by the Defendant, and set up a collateral security interest of KRW 18 million in the value of the claim against the Defendant as a security for the said loan obligation by receiving a loan of KRW 30 million from the victim JB Capital Co., Ltd. (payment of KRW 14.9% per month, interest on KRW 14.9% per month, KRW 1,308,491) from the victim JB Capital Co., Ltd. under the pretext of a loan for the purchase of heavy automobiles.

However, on February 10, 2015, the Defendant: (a) ordered a person without a name name to drive the above excavation equipment at the construction site; (b) did not inform the victim of the location of the construction site where the excavation equipment was put into the construction site; and (c) the victim could not be identified.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed his own property, which is the object of the victim's right, and obstructed the victim's exercise of right.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H in part;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, an application for debate on motor vehicle, an application for registration of construction machinery, an inquiry about the details of receipt, a notice of loss of time limit, a voluntary auction decision, and a protocol not delivered

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 323 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime. Article 323 (Selection of Penalty Penalty)

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant, as to the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, was the ownership of F Co., Ltd. at the time of the loan, the representative director was H at the time of the loan, the Defendant was registered as the representative director, and the Defendant was not able to take over the mining ground of this case from H after the registration as the representative director, and the Defendant was managed and operated by H, so, the Defendant did not conceal the mining ground of this case.

In full view of the following circumstances that can be duly admitted and examined by evidence, the defendant was actually at the time when H was the representative director.