The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error/legal scenario) ① at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement (the time of June 2009), F and G were partially revoked. Rather, E was subject to a provisional attachment order of KRW 709,44,74 against F, and the court believed that E was merely aware that there was a claim to F, G, etc., by trusting the court’s decision, and thus, there was no intention to evade compulsory execution, and ② at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, E was engaged in normal banking transactions, and there was no need to conceal or harm the obligee, in light of the fact that there was sufficient means to sell approximately 1.3 billion won at the time of the initial conclusion of the instant lease agreement (the time of the instant lease agreement) and that there was no need to conceal the property under the name of the Defendant, and ③ The lease agreement of this case was concluded with the intention to conceal the property under the name of the Defendant, and there was no need to conceal the property under the name of the latter.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence presented in the judgment of the court below as to the facts charged in this case, the family members of the defendant, including E, are Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government AC Apartment 904.