logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.21 2015노1295
강제집행면탈
Text

All appeals filed against Defendants A and C by the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The act of opening a new account in the name of Defendant A and B (Seoul Southern District Court Order 2012Kadan3009 dated April 10, 2012) after the decision of provisional seizure of this case (Seoul Southern District Court Order 2012Kadan3009 dated April 10, 201) and receiving money from the overseas trader G (hereinafter “company”) was not an act of making the debtor clarify the location of the company’s property or making the ownership unknown.

B) An act of transferring transaction funds from an overseas trader that has been transferred to the account of the instant provisional seizure to a new account under the name of the company (hereinafter “second act”).

(2) The sentencing of the first instance court on the above Defendants (Defendant A: 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable, since its contents are clearly confirmed.

B. Defendant C1’s assertion as to Defendant C1’s act is not an act of making the location of the company’s property, which is the debtor, unknown or making it unclear.

B) Defendant C merely gave advice to Defendant A and B to engage in the first act in accordance with the business regulations of the new bank, but did not conceal the company’s property, and did not do so. Defendant C did not take charge of the practice of the first act, but the first act was conducted in accordance with the above business regulations. 2) The first instance sentencing (fine 5 million won) against Defendant C is too unreasonable.

C. The sentencing of the first instance court on the above Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the Defendants

A. In the first instance court, the Defendants asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal, and the first instance court's reasoning is the defendants and the second instance's reasons for appeal.

arrow