beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is running a restaurant on the first floor of the C building in Pakistan, and the complainant is the owner of the C building 105, and on January 1, 2008, the Defendant agreed to lease the above No. 1705, Jan. 1, 2008 to the Defendant A with a monthly rent of 1.7 million won, and a mutual lease relationship was established.
Although the Defendant is obliged to pay the rent of 1.7 million won each month under the above lease agreement, the Defendant, who did not pay the rent from March 201 to July 2012, intended to not pay the rent, was willing to proceed with a civil lawsuit against the above overdue rent, collect the claim, and issued a certificate of the content that the Defendant would continue to seize and collect the rent of 15.3 million won on July 16, 2012 without paying the rent of 15.3 million won in arrears to the Defendant’s credit card sales.
As above, the Defendant knew that the complainant would proceed with compulsory civil execution for the purpose of receiving rents in arrears, and, with the intent to escape from such civil execution, changed the person who received the sales from the new card, the national card, and the BC card company under the name of the Defendant into the name of the Defendant’s wife F, thereby interfering with the complainant’s debt collection.
2. The crime of evasion of compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act is a creditor's right, which is the basis of compulsory execution, because the protection of creditor's right is the principal legal interest.
Therefore, if the existence of a claim is not recognized, the crime of evading compulsory execution is not established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do2252, Aug. 30, 201). As to whether the complainant has a rent claim against the Defendant after March 2011, in light of health care, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, it is insufficient to recognize it solely based on the E’s legal statement, the police’s statement, the protocol of protocol of statement, and the content certification, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
E was owned by E.