1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months;

2. Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

Punishment of the crime

On September 4, 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 11,00,000 from the Hyundai Capital D branch of the victimized Company, in order to raise the purchase price for the motor vehicle by purchasing CPoter-II cargo vehicles from the mutual influoral used cars located in Geumyang-si, Namyang-si. On the same day, the Defendant registered collateral security of KRW 11,00,000,000 as the mortgagee for the foregoing cargo vehicles as collateral.

On November 2014, the Defendant: (a) borrowed the above cargo vehicle, which is the object of the right of the victimized Company, from the name in the office near Si/Gunri-si; (b) made it impossible for the victimized Company to find the said cargo vehicle under the security; and (c) obstructed the exercise of the right by concealing its object that became the object of another’s right.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A criminal complaint and a supplementary statement;

1. A written application for a heavy loan from modern capital;

1. Original Register of Automobile Registration;

1. Application of the maximum statute to the exercise of right to collateral security;

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the suspended sentence is that the defendant obtained a loan from the injured party and set up a right to collateral on his/her own vehicle as a security, and that the above vehicle was delivered to the injured party and concealed it.

The crime of using a car offered as security for another person not only causes property damage to the secured party, but also may cause various problems by operating a lane thereafter, and thus, the responsibility for the crime of this case is not weak (in fact, the defendant, after committing the crime of this case, attempted to recover his own vehicle, but it has become impossible to grasp his location by disposing of the vehicle to a third party. However, the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected against all of the crimes of this case, and the defendant was in the past.