The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Incheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Of the crimes of invalidation of indication in the line of duty under Article 140(1) of the Criminal Act, "an act detrimental to its effectiveness by any other means such as seizure or indication of other compulsory measures performed by a public official with respect to his/her duties" means de facto reduction or elimination of the validity of the indication itself by any means other than damage or concealment, and it does not mean that the legal effect of a disposition, which is the basis for the indication, should be lost even (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do8238, Oct. 28, 2004). Meanwhile, in cases where an execution officer had a debtor keep the movable in custody of the movable in the course of provisional seizure, the effect of provisional seizure is to prohibit disposal of the seized movable (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7407, Dec. 24, 2008). In cases where the debtor transfers the movable property to a third party, it constitutes a act of de facto reduction or extinguishment of the provisional seizure itself, barring any special circumstances.

This was found to be the place where the debtor and the transferee had the movable property provisionally seized.

The same shall also apply to the case.

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court sold the movable property with a provisional attachment indication attached, thereby impairing the utility of the indication of provisional attachment.

“In relation to the facts charged of this case, the judgment of the court of first instance which found the Defendant guilty was reversed for the following reasons, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty.

① At the time of transferring facilities within the instant store to H, the Defendant notified that some of the corporeal movables are provisionally seized, and the corporeal movables were scheduled to continue to be kept in the said store until legal problems are resolved.

(2) The execution of provisional seizure shall have the effect of prohibiting the sale, gift, and all other dispositions by the debtor on the object, but it shall be a disposition by the debtor.