beta
Main Issues
Requirements for the crime of evading compulsory execution
Summary of Judgment
The crime of evading compulsory execution is established when the creditor damages the creditor by concealing, destroying, falsely transferring, or falsely bearing the obligation under the specific risk to be subject to compulsory execution. Here, the situation in which there is a concrete risk to be subject to compulsory execution means the case in which the creditor has filed a claim for performance or a request for provisional attachment or provisional injunction for the purpose of preserving the claim.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 327 of the Criminal Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 82Do311 Decided May 25, 1982
Escopics
Defendant
upper and high-ranking persons
Prosecutor
Judgment of the lower court
Daejeon District Court Decision 85No591 delivered on May 23, 1986
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
We examine the prosecutor's grounds of appeal.
The crime of evading compulsory execution is established at the time of prejudice to creditors by bearing any profit from, damage, false transfer of property or false debt under specific danger to be forced execution, and the situation with specific danger to be enforced here refers to cases where creditors file an application for provisional attachment or provisional disposition or file an application for provisional disposition to preserve the claim for performance (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do311, May 25, 1982). According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, where the deceased non-party 1, his father of the defendant, borrowed money from the victim deposit money as stated in its reasoning and the deceased non-party 1 did not repay his money among them, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the non-indicted 1’s disposal of the unregistered building in question, and the deceased non-indicted 1 agreed to appropriate it for the claim by the court below with the intention of disposal of it in mind, and subsequent to the death of the deceased non-indicted 1 and the deceased non-indicted 1, his heir, his payment of interest, and there was no error in the court below’s finding that the above non-indicted building was unlawful in its name or non-indicted 2.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices O Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)