The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event that there was no risk of undermining or undermining creditors due to a new assertion filed later than the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, the court below's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the part of the court below's judgment stated in the summary of the oral proceedings on August 17, 2015, which was submitted after the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal. Therefore, the aforementioned assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles shall be considered within the scope of supplement to the grounds for appeal

At the time of changing the ownership of F dump truck (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) to G, the Defendant had a wage claim equivalent to KRW 15 million against E, and had another dump truck owned by C, there was no intention to evade compulsory execution or compulsory execution that the Defendant would evade compulsory execution to E by evading compulsory execution.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio determination.

When the prosecutor was in the trial, "the defendant is the actual operator of C, and the victim D is the representative of E, a corporation." As "the defendant is the actual operator of C, a corporation." The defendant applied for amendments to the indictment with the content of changing "from E, a corporation operating the victim," " from E, a corporation operating the victim," and the subject of the trial was changed by the court's permission.

In addition, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the trial court, the defendant is at the Suwon District Court on April 15, 2015.