The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (legal scenarios) is included in the scope of the property to be entered in the list of property that the Defendant received every month, and thus, the failure to enter it constitutes a violation of the Civil Execution Act. However, it is unlawful for the court below to determine that it is not an asset to be entered in the list of property and to determine the Defendant

2. Determination

A. The obligor’s summary of the facts charged in the instant case may not make a false list of property on the date of specification of property conducted under the Civil Execution Act.

1) On April 27, 2015, the Defendant appeared at the court of Mapo-gu Seoul Western District Court 1001, the 174 Seoul Western District Court (Seoul Western District Court 2013Kadan5009), and submitted a false list of property without stating the national pension regularly paid every month and the basic pension despite the existence of such basic pension. 2) The Defendant submitted a false list of property in the case of specification of property (Seoul Western District Court 2015Kadan3293), which was conducted at the request of the obligee C, on November 16, 2015, when the Defendant was present at the date of specification of property each month at the request of the obligee C (Seoul District Court 2015Kadan3293).

B. The lower court rendered a judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the following grounds.

1) The Civil Execution Act, while punishing the debtor to make a false statement of property in the procedure for specification of property (Article 68(9) of the Civil Execution Act), excludes corporeal movables and claims prohibited from seizure from property list (Article 64(3) of the Civil Execution Act, Article 28(2) of the Civil Execution Rule, Articles 195, 246(1)1, 246(1)2, and 3 of the Civil Execution Act, and the contents and the debtor of these relevant provisions.