A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On May 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) operated a restaurant with the name of “D” (hereinafter “instant restaurant”); and (b) around May 10, 2013, the victim E applied for provisional attachment against seven card companies, including the Defendant’s non-CC Card Co., Ltd. to obtain a provisional attachment order; and (c) filed a claim suit (Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2013Da3169) seeking payment against the Defendant on June 10, 2013. On July 19, 2013, the Defendant filed a claim suit (Seoul East East District Court Decision 2013Da3169) including a written request for the withdrawal and cancellation of the execution of provisional attachment application for the said provisional attachment order. The Defendant received a written request for the withdrawal of provisional attachment from the court to the effect that the Defendant would pay KRW 30 million to the victim within 5 days from the date of service of the provisional attachment cancellation order.”

After that, on July 30, 2013, the victim applied for the rescission of provisional seizure against the claim and the provisional seizure against the above claim was rescinded. However, on August 23, 2013, the defendant violated the contents of mediation and did not pay the victim KRW 7 million and did not pay the remainder of KRW 26 million to the victim.

1. On September 23, 2013, the Defendant changed the name of the proprietor of the instant restaurant from Jeju Tax Office, which was located in Jeju Office building, to F, his own child, for the purpose of evading compulsory execution against credit card sales, credit card sales, credit card sales, etc. of the instant restaurant, and operated the instant restaurant until November 5, 2013, and concealed credit card sales, credit card sales, etc. of the instant restaurant.

2. The Defendant, as stated in Paragraph 1, has changed the name of the representative of business registration to F and has been engaged in the business, but the Defendant, despite the change of the above name, was discovered by the Jeju Tax Code that the Defendant continues the business as it is and the F’s business registration has been processed ex officio.