강제집행면탈
Defendants are acquitted, and each of them dismissed the application for compensation order of this case by the applicant for compensation.
1. Defendant B is a person who operated a sales store with the trade name “E” from around 1997, and Defendant A is a person who worked as a business employee in the above E.
Defendant
A, at the Daegu District Court on May 12, 2006, received the claim seizure and collection order from the creditor, the debtor, Defendant A and the third debtor as a financial institution such as the new bank, etc., and the defendant A was unable to receive the benefit as the deposit account of the defendant. The defendant was willing to evade compulsory execution by receiving the benefit from the transfer to another person's deposit account.
Accordingly, with a view to evading compulsory execution against Defendant A, the Defendants conspired, and the Defendant A demanded that Defendant B be unable to receive benefits from the passbook attached to the passbook, and that “the benefit would have been remitted to Defendant A as the passbook.” Defendant B accepted it from December 26, 2007 to August 25, 2009, and concealed Defendant A’s benefit equivalent to the same amount by remitting KRW 44,120,000 in total to the Daegu Bank Account (G) of F, an accounting account, from December 26, 2007 to August 25, 2009.
2. The offense of evasion of compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act shall be established where there is a risk of undermining the creditors by concealing, destroying, transferring or falsely bearing false debts, with the intention of evading any compulsory execution under the Civil Procedure Act, under the condition that there is a concern for objectively being subject to compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition;
(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do2476 Decided May 29, 2008, etc.). However, according to the records and arguments in this case, D filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for a loan claim with the Daegu District Court 2003Gahap7849, which stated that “Defendant A shall jointly and severally with Defendant H to pay KRW 217,905,638 out of KRW 350,405,638, and delay damages therefor,” and D shall be rendered a favorable judgment with Defendant H, which stated that “The Defendant A shall pay the amount of KRW 217,905,638 out of KRW 350,405,638,” and that judgment shall become final and conclusive, and subsequent D shall December 2