Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

Around October 29, 2015, the Defendant borrowed KRW 23 million from D, but failed to repay the borrowed money and interest from D around January 16, 2018. Around January 16, 2018, D and notary public drafted an authentic deed of a monetary loan agreement that recognizes compulsory execution if the Defendant repaid the borrowed money and interest from E law firm to October 30, 2018.

D requested a seizure and collection order based on the above notarial deed to the public order branch of the Daejeon District Court as the defendant did not pay the principal, interest, etc., and in the public order branch of the Daejeon District Court around September 18, 2018, the Daejeon District Court issued a seizure and collection order as to the defendant's credit card merchant's credit card merchant's credit card company.

The Defendant, who is likely to be subject to compulsory execution from D, had the name of the business operator of the above landing point he operated, had F, his father, transferred his name to F, and had F, a new business operator registered on or around December 3, 2018 (business registration number G), and he reported the closure of business on or around December 10, 2018.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the defendant's property in order to escape compulsory execution.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and H in each part;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on notarial deeds;

1. Relevant Article 327 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 327 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts as follows:

The Defendant only prepared a notarial deed in a formal manner at D’s request even though D used D’s borrowed money as a partner and did not have any reason to return the said money. Therefore, there is no claim that serves as the basis for compulsory execution.

B. The Defendant.