logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2013.11.20 2013고정632
강제집행면탈
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged lies in the following facts: (a) the Defendant, like C, by deceiving the victim D, by deceiving 218,891,639 won, was subject to criminal punishment; (b) the victim filed a claim for compensation for damages (Seoul Northern District Court) and received a judgment to pay damages; and (c) the Defendant collected money on November 24, 201 and then the Defendant collected KRW 5,346,934 from the victim to the post office.

On November 24, 2011, the Defendant changed the account of a financial institution receiving benefits from the F located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, to the H account of the Jeju Bank, with the aim of evading compulsory execution against monthly pay, and notifies the I of the monthly salary.

B. On or before October 23, 2012, at the above location, notify I of the monthly salary-level person in charge of the payment of benefits by changing the payment account from the Jeju Bank H Account from the H Account of the Jeju Bank to the J of the Bank Account;

C. Around February 24, 2012, at the above location, the said location changed the benefit receipt account from the KK account of the KTI to the KK account of the KK account of the KTI in Daegu Bank, and concealed the number of the passbook by changing the number of the passbook over three occasions, and exempted compulsory execution by the victim’s title.

2. Determination

A. The crime of evading compulsory execution under Article 327 of the Criminal Act is established in cases where there is a risk of undermining creditors by concealing, destroying, transferring or falsely bearing any property for the purpose of evading any subjective compulsory execution under the conditions that are likely to be subject to compulsory execution, provisional seizure, or provisional disposition under the Civil Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do2476, May 29, 2008). Here, the term “covering” refers to the cases where the discovery of property is impossible or difficult with respect to a person executing compulsory execution. It includes not only the cases where the location of the property is unknown but also the cases where the ownership of the property is unknown.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3387, Oct. 9, 2003).

arrow