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

[Reference Facts] On February 9, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around February 9, 2015, there was a debt of KRW 167,534,454 to be repaid to the Victim C; (b) transferred 28 movable property, including D equivalent to KRW 234,00,00,000, the market price of the Defendant’s ownership, as security; and (c) drafted a fair certificate to the effect that there was no objection even if compulsory execution is conducted immediately when the said debt is not performed.

On the other hand, the victim began to demand the defendant to repay the above debt on June 2016, and the defendant changed the business registration in his name E and F, the victim filed a civil lawsuit against the defendant, E and F in order.

Ultimately, in order to avoid the victim’s compulsory execution, the Defendant had expressed 28 tangible properties, such as the above D, as if they were transferred to the above F.

[2] On July 15, 2016, the Defendant changed the name of the above workplace from the “H” office located in Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, to “I”, and the business operator from the above E to the above F, but the actual place of business was the Defendant’s operation, and 28 of corporeal movables were still owned by the Defendant.

On the other hand, on July 12, 2017, the victim filed a civil suit with the Incheon District Court to request the above F to deliver 28 tangible movables, such as D, to the defendant on July 12, 2017 in order to execute the claims stated in the above premise. In order to enforce the above premise, there was a risk of compulsory execution as to the above 28 tangible movables of the defendant.

Accordingly, around August 29, 2017, the Defendant arbitrarily used the F’s name at an irregular place, and prepared a written answer stating the false fact that “F had transferred ownership by taking over 28 tangible movable property from the Defendant for the repayment of the property in lieu of the property.” On August 29, 2017, the Defendant submitted the written answer to the Incheon District Court.

Accordingly, in order to evade compulsory execution, 28 of the movable property owned by the defendant is false.