logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2012.11.08 2011노5043
강제집행면탈
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not falsely transfer the “D” to G, the former wife, by intention, or by fraudulent means.

In addition, the defendant does not have any profit by paying taxes in the process of the above transfer, and paying all of the money according to the decision of recommending reconciliation in civil litigation with F. It does not constitute a crime of evading compulsory execution.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, false transfer means the alteration of the ownership of property by taking the form of transfer on the surface despite the absence of actual intention of transfer, and the concealment means that a person who executes compulsory execution makes it impossible or difficult to discover the debtor’s property. If there is a risk that a creditor’s property may be harmed by such act, the crime of evasion of compulsory execution is established, and the crime of evasion of compulsory execution is not established, but it does not necessarily lead to the actual damage of the creditor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do4759, Nov. 27, 2001).

From May 1, 1998 to December 2007, the Defendant: (a) married with G around 1998, the Defendant practically operated the Contact Manufacturing Company using the trade name called I in the name of G from May 1, 1998 to December 1, 2007; (b) around January 1, 2006, the Defendant acquired the said “I” under the name of E (the Defendant did not have any son created between the Defendant and the Defendant) a child of the Defendant (the Defendant did not pay a separate purchase price to G) and actually operated the said “D” (the Defendant succeeded to the obligation of the said “I” and did not pay a separate purchase price to G).

PVC.

arrow