beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.
Reasons
1. Defendant A and the victim I of the facts charged of the instant case completed the marriage report on December 10, 1987, and they were legally married couple on December 21, 2007.
Around December 18, 2009, the victim I filed a petition for a trial on division of property with Defendant A, and the Seoul Family Court rendered a judgment ordering payment of money as a property division, and there is concern for the victim I to be subject to compulsory execution from the victim I. The Defendants, in collusion, decided that the establishment of a false mortgage registration on the real estate owned by Defendant A was completed in the name of Defendant B with a view to avoiding compulsory execution. Although Defendant A did not bear any obligation with respect to Defendant B, the fact was around January 30, 2013, even if Defendant A did not bear any obligation with respect to the land owned by Defendant A, the victim, who was the creditor, by setting up a right to collateral security amount of KRW 1.2 billion under the name of the member-gu J and K (hereinafter “instant land”).
2. Determination
A. The crime of evading compulsory execution is a crime that is established with a risk of undermining creditors at least, and even if the property was concealed with the intent to escape from compulsory execution, it is difficult to readily conclude that there is another property sufficient to secure creditor’s execution at the time of the act, such as concealing the debtor’s property, if there exists another property sufficient to secure creditor
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5165, Sept. 8, 2011). (B)
As of January 30, 2013, which established the right to collateral security on the instant land, Defendant A had sufficient property to secure execution of Defendant A.
C. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly examined and adopted by this court and the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 8, 14 through 22 submitted by the defendants, the following facts are as follows: ① With respect to the land of this case owned by the defendant A, the maximum debt amount of November 30, 2006 KRW 3.12 billion on February 18, 2009.