The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a misunderstanding of the legal principles, sold 103-dong 1303 of the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment building owned by himself/herself (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to change a difficult economic situation, and performed a legal act in the name of the Defendant’s wife in Pyeongtaek-gu.

As a result, the above apartment lease agreement was also executed in the name of the Defendant’s wife, and even if the Defendant did not escape from compulsory execution, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles regarding the crime of evading compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act is a dangerous crime, and the crime of evading compulsory execution under the Civil Execution Act is established when there is a risk of undermining creditors by concealing, destroying, or falsely transferring property for the purpose of evading compulsory execution under the Civil Execution Act, and by bearing a false obligation, and it does not necessarily lead to damaging creditors or an offender’s profit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do11709, Jun. 11, 2015). In addition, “the concealment of property” refers to cases where the discovery of property is impossible or difficult with respect to a person executing compulsory execution, as well as where the ownership of property is unknown (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4522, Oct. 13, 2005).