The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by four months of imprisonment.

except that this judgment.

1. The judgment of this court on February 2, 198, on the following grounds: (a) erroneous determination of the gist of the grounds for appeal or misunderstanding of the legal principles (with respect to evasion of compulsory execution, the defendant had only the claim against E Co., Ltd. for allowances; (b) even if he changed the payment account of allowances to the former husband’s account under the pretext of division of property or consolation money following the divorce, the defendant’s property cannot be deemed concealed; and (c) on the grounds of fraudulent bankruptcy, the defendant did not conceal property for the aforementioned reason, and on the grounds that he stated not only passively “not receiving” at the time of filing a petition for bankruptcy

A. In full view of various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, etc., the conclusion of the first instance judgment which assessed the Defendant’s act of making the ownership of the allowance claim unclear by changing the receipt account of the instant allowance in the name of D, the former husband, and receiving the Defendant’s allowance to the said account (the Defendant used money deposited in the said account by using the card, etc. of passbook in the name of D) and the crime of evasion of compulsory execution and the crime of concealment of property as referred to in the crime of fraud in the crime of fraudulent bankruptcy is justifiable, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that affected the judgment

B. In full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the first instance court sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor, taking into account the following factors: (a) there is no criminal power on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing; (b) there was an agreement between the Defendant and the Plaintiff F, the actual victim of the instant case