Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A The representative of D) and the defendant B are the children of the above E Corporation, and the victim F is the former employee of the above E Corporation.

On December 31, 2013, the Defendants were subject to provisional attachment of the above claims against (i) the third obligor, Gwangju Bank, Dok Card Co., Ltd., and (ii) the said claims against (iii) the obligor(s).

However, on November 18, 2013, the Defendants changed the sales claim of D, which is likely to be subject to compulsory execution from the victim, to E corporation.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to avoid compulsory execution and concealed sales claims subject to compulsory execution, thereby evading compulsory execution by the title of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. The decision on provisional seizure against claims [the defendants and their defense counsel asserts that there was no purpose or intention of evading compulsory execution. The "ciring property" in the crime of evading compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act means that a person executing compulsory execution makes it impossible or difficult to discover the property, and includes not only the case where the location of the property is unknown but also the case where the ownership of the property is unclear. In this case, the defendants stated that even if D's sales claims accrue due to various lawsuits and seizures with G, provisional seizures by the creditors including the victim, or seizures by the creditors of wages including the victim, the defendants changed D's sales claims to E corporation for the purpose of continuously carrying on business, making it impossible to use the money, making it impossible to use the money actually, and therefore, even according to the defendants' statement, the defendants changed D's sales claims into E corporation with the purpose and intentional intent to circumvent the victim's provisional seizure in order to continue the D's business. Therefore, the above assertion is without

1. Relevant Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts