beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. On April 30, 198, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant completed a marriage report with the victim B and the husband and wife; (b) the victim brought a lawsuit for divorce, divorce, consolation money, and claim for division of property between the Daegu Family Court on July 23, 2015; (c) at the same time, filed an application for provisional seizure on the real estate in the name of the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant’s application for provisional seizure on August 6, 2015 that the original copy of the complaint and the decision on provisional seizure were served to the Dong C; and (e) was likely to be subject to compulsory execution on the property owned by the Defendant by the claim for consolation money and the claim for division of property, the Defendant released the money in the deposit account in the name of the
On August 12, 2015, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 139,957,00 from the D account under the Defendant’s name as a check, and received and kept in cash on the same day. On the same day, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 100,000 from the D account under the Defendant’s name as a check, and received and kept in cash on the same day. On the same day, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 357,391,630 from the E account under the Defendant’s name as a check and received and kept in cash on the same day.
Accordingly, in order to escape compulsory execution, the defendant stored cash of 597,348,630 won in an unsound place, thereby damaging the victim who is the creditor.
2. Determination
A. The crime of escape from compulsory execution is at least a crime which is constituted by the risk of undermining creditors, and the property was concealed in order to escape from compulsory execution.
Even if there is another property sufficient to secure the execution of the creditor on the basis of the debtor's act of concealing the debtor's property, etc., it is likely to harm or impair the creditor.
It is not readily concluded (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5165, Sept. 8, 2011). Moreover, the conviction in a criminal trial has probative value that leads a judge to feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.