강제집행면탈
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.
1. Defendant A is the former representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) and H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”). G and H hold approximately 100% shares of Defendant A’s pro-friendly type of shares, and in fact, Defendant A is an individual company. Defendant B is the chief secretary of J’s deputy office (general secretary), and Defendant C is the chief secretary of J’s deputy office.
G Around 2008, K, a creditor of G, filed a lawsuit claiming the return of loans of KRW 3 billion against G, and received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of G around June 2009, and conducted compulsory execution on movable property and securities, etc. in the treasury of G office with the above final and conclusive judgment as executive title, but only the repayment of small amount of claims was made.
Accordingly, around August 2009, G and Defendant A agreed with K, the debt amount of G to K is KRW 3.9 billion in total with the principal and interest amount, KRW 200 million in installments in six months with respect to the above debt amount, and Defendant A jointly and severally guaranteed the above debt amount. Since G paid a sum of KRW 800 million to K four times in total, but G did not repay the remainder of the debt amount, at around October 201, the debt amount of K reaches KRW 3.1 billion in total.
On the other hand, around December 15, 2009, G deposited KRW 1 billion in the bank account in the name of L, a company specializing in Internet video lectures (hereinafter “L”) at the time of entering the bank account in the name of G on December 15, 2009, and upon deposit of KRW 1 billion in the bank account in the name of L, a company specializing in Internet video lectures (hereinafter “L”), G acquired the loan claim for L in the amount of KRW 1 billion. At that time, G borrowed the name of M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) and entered into a borrowed loan agreement with its creditor. Accordingly, G held the loan claim for L in the name of M as the borrowed name of M around October 201.
Defendants, in the situation that G around October 201, around 201, is unable to repay the remaining debt to K, in collusion with the aim of evading further compulsory execution against G and Defendant A.