The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Victim N Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “N”).

(A) On November 14, 2008, when the period of repayment of the secured debt has yet to be duly established at the time of the instant crime for the following reasons, the victim N (hereinafter “J”) entered into a construction contract with the Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) and agreed to preferentially repay the loan to financial institutions with the sale price to be received by the J, and to receive the payment of the remainder of the sale price. On December 26, 2011, the J paid the principal and interest of the Bank to our Savings on December 26, 2011, and thus the victim’s claim for the construction payment to J was due on December 26, 201. At the time of the instant crime, on October 27, 2011, the period of repayment of the secured debt of the instant lien did not arrive.

B) On June 22, 2011, the illegal possession J and the Korea Savings Bank, its creditor, entered into a security service contract with the security service company and the security service contract. From June 23, 201, the next day, Co-Defendant A et al., Defendant A et al., and occupied the construction site of this case. Since the victim Nrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhnhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

2. Therefore, the judgment of the court below convicting the victim of the facts charged in this case that the victim's right of retention was duly established at the time of the crime of this case, by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the requirements for establishing a right of retention, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.