1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

(b).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following additional determination, and thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article

2. The Defendants’ additional determination was made in this court, and it is difficult to recognize that D was “in an imminent situation where D would be subject to compulsory execution” on November 2, 2011, on the grounds that it was difficult to recognize that D transferred shares to Defendant B, the Defendants submitted the written judgment of the case in the Chuncheon District Court, Seoul Branch of the Chuncheon District Court, which acquitted Defendant of evasion of compulsory execution against D on the grounds that it was difficult to acknowledge that D was “in an imminent situation where D would be subject to compulsory execution.” It emphasizes that there was no high probability that the Plaintiff’s tax claim against D at the time of the instant transfer contract would have occurred.

However, under the Criminal Act, evasion of compulsory execution refers to an act to evade compulsory execution, provisional seizure, and provisional disposition under the Civil Execution Act, and its meaning differs from that of fraudulent act under the Civil Act. Therefore, the crime of evasion of compulsory execution cannot be deemed as identical to the “high probability that a claim may arise” of the fraudulent act.

Therefore, the evidence No. 4 submitted by the Defendants in this Court does not affect the fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendants' appeal is dismissed.