beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.10.16 2015노577

강제집행면탈

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that there was a decision of performance recommendation and a mistake of legal principles cannot be deemed to be clear that there was a possibility of losing a lawsuit, and it is confirmed through the testimony of J and a confirmation of facts of H that the defendant is not the actual operator of H. The fact that the defendant changed the name of the business operator is based on the judgment of H, which is the actual operator, and the defendant did not have any purpose or intention to evade compulsory execution, but the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant as to the facts in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the crime of evading compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act is a dangerous crime and is in an objective condition that is practically likely to be subject to compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition under the Civil Procedure Act, namely, where the creditor is at risk of undermining the creditor by concealing, destroying, transferring, or bearing false debts for the purpose of evading subjective compulsory execution under the state where the creditor appears to institute or institute a lawsuit for preservation of the principal claim or in the state where he/she appears to bring a lawsuit for preservation of the principal claim or in the state

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Do3999 Decided June 28, 2012, etc.). The following circumstances recognized by the court of the lower judgment based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court (i.e., “D” operated by the said court, namely, (i) from August 201 to August 2012, 201, suffered financial difficulties, such as (ii) the amount of goods supplied by the victim F from around KRW 20 million and the amount of money equivalent to KRW 13,200,000,000,000 from KRW 12 months, and (iii) the contract was terminated at the headquarters around August 2012, 2012.