A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

From July 1, 2007 to November 30, 2019, the Defendant had a duty to not arbitrarily create a security right to tourist bus vehicles located in the foregoing corporation, as the representative director of the company B and D corporation on the first floor of the C Dong C, and there was a duty to not arbitrarily create a security right to the tourist bus vehicles located in the above corporation.

Nevertheless, on July 7, 2015, the Defendant, in violation of the foregoing duty, borrowed KRW 130 million from E Co., Ltd. at an influent place, and the Victim F arbitrarily created a mortgage of KRW 78 million on G bus vehicles that entered D Co., Ltd. as security.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 78 million and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount from the victim who was the borrower.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. The protocol of each police statement concerning F containing the statement of F in the protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the accused by the prosecution;

1. As a result of inquiry into the investigation report (Attachment of a certified copy, etc. of a corporate registry) and a certified copy of the corporate registry attached thereto (D Co., Ltd.), investigation report (Attachment of transaction details, etc.), and H passbook savings deposit transaction details attached thereto, receipt of remittance of copy of I passbook, receipt of vehicle registration, vehicle registration ledger, statement of installment repayment plan, I passbook, I passbook, and the summary of the argument on the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion as to entry into a charter bus under the Passenger Transport Service Act is prohibited, since the victim entered the company operated by the defendant, since he was asked about the details of deposit transaction (D), E financial transaction confirmation, confirmation, and the statement of entry and departure transaction.

Even if ownership of the instant vehicle belongs to the company operated by the defendant, the ownership of the instant vehicle belongs to the company operated by the defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant set up a collateral on the instant vehicle.

Even if he exercises his authority as the owner, and even if the defendant bears the duty to transfer the ownership of the vehicle of this case to the victim in the future, it is nothing more than the civil obligation.