On April 12, 2014, the Defendant issued one copy of the household check in the name of the Defendant, which is named as ‘D', ‘3,000,000 won at the face value', ‘the bank' at the place of payment', and ‘the date of issuance on July 12, 2014 at the office of C operated by the Defendant in Busan-gu, Seoul-si, the Defendant issued one copy of the household check in the name of the Defendant, ‘the date of issuance on July 12, 2014, to â

However, the last holder of the check (the note) presented payment to the bank within the time limit for presentment for payment, but did not pay due to the shortage of deposit.

From April 17, 2000, the Defendant opened and issued a comprehensive deposit account with the National Bank of Korea from the Franchise of Franchise(2014).

On April 2014, the Defendant issued a check number G, face value G, 3,000,000, and one copy of the household check in the name of the Defendant, the bank at the place of payment, at the C office operated by the Defendant at the end of the end of the night-si, Busan Metropolitan City.

However, due to the failure to recover the price of goods, the Defendant failed to pay the said issuance checks that the holder proposed to pay within the period for presentation of payment on July 21, 2014 due to the shortage of deposit.

2. Examination of judgment, which is a crime falling under Article 2(2) of the Illegal Check Control Act, in case where the person who prepared or issued the check under paragraph (4) of the same Article collects the check, a public prosecution may not be instituted.

However, according to the records of this case, since the defendant was found to have recovered the above check after the prosecution of this case was instituted, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.