beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against the defendant is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Jeju District Court Panel Division.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor, the term "harbor property" in the crime of evading compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act refers to the act of making a person executing compulsory execution impossible or difficult to discover the property. It 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 (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3387, Oct. 9, 2003). The circumstance that the debtor changes his business registration registered in the name of a third party and another third party’s name is insufficient to readily conclude that the change in the name of the creditor causes damage to the creditor by making the creditor know about the ownership of corporeal movables in the place of business more clearly than the previous one.
The judgment below
According to the reasoning, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance convicting the defendant of this part of the charges on the ground that it cannot be said that the change in the business name of the above convenience store cannot be seen as making it difficult for the victim to discover the defendant's property, on the grounds that there is no evidence to recognize that the ownership relationship of corporeal movables in the above convenience store was more unclear due to the change in the business registration name as above, on the grounds that the defendant's business registration as to the "G convenience store" did not report the closure of the business registration under the name of the defendant's accommodation, the defendant's business registration as to the "G convenience store" was made and the defendant's business registration was newly registered under the name
In light of the above legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the concealment of the crime of evading compulsory execution.
2. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal
A. The lower court: (a) the Defendant.