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

On February 30, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with F (State) for the construction of multi-household housing on the land B, C, D, and E, the Defendant owned by the Defendant, and the construction was suspended due to the Defendant’s failure to pay the amount of public fraud while the construction was being subcontracted by the Victim G from F (State). On May 30, 2013, the Defendant set up a collateral security right of KRW 400 million on the said real estate to secure the construction cost to be paid.

On June 27, 2013, the Defendant could proceed with the construction work only when the Defendant withdraws the auction and cancels the right to collateral security against the defective victim with the application for voluntary auction under the said right to collateral security.

On July 30, 2013, the victim paid KRW 50 million on the same day, instead of cancelling the withdrawal of auction and the registration of the establishment of a right to collateral security. On September 11, 2013, the victim drafted a certificate of fairness in monetary consumption lending and borrowing contract with the effect that the victim will pay KRW 175 million for the remainder of the construction cost on September 30, 2013 and KRW 175 million on October 30, 2013 and KRW 125 million on January 30, 2014.

On October 24, 2013, the Defendant: (a) filed a provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership on the land B and C (hereinafter “instant land”) under the name of the Defendant; (b) on August 17, 2015, the Changwon District Court Seoyang Branch rendered a provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership on the ground of a pre-sale under the name of H; and (c) on August 7, 2015, the principal registration based on the provisional registration was completed on the name of H on the ground of a sale on August 7, 2015 in the name of H.

However, in fact, the Defendant had no intent to transfer the instant land to H or representative, and the injured party possessed the aforementioned process certificate, and changed the ownership of the land to be exempted from compulsory execution under the condition that other creditors are likely to be subject to compulsory execution, such as provisional seizure of the instant land.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed and falsely transferred property for the purpose of evading compulsory execution, thereby damaging the victim who is the creditor.

Summary of Evidence

1. The witness G’s legal statement