However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

From October 29, 1982, the Defendant entered into a contract for household and current check in the name of the head of the Seoul Bank and the Defendant, and traded household and current check.

On April 26, 1995, the Defendant issued one copy of the check check per bank in the name of the Defendant, which was named as the check number “E”, the check amount “8,00,000,000”, and the date of issuance “Seoul, 26, 1995” at the Defendant’s residence located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu.

On July 26, 1995, the Defendant issued the total sum of KRW 11,53,00,000 in the same manner and presented each payment within the payment period, in the same place as shown in the attached list of crimes, from the beginning of July 1995, including that the check was not paid as a disposition of suspension of transaction, even though the check was presented to the above bank on July 26, 1995, which was within the payment period, and did not receive as a disposition of suspension of transaction, even if it was presented within the payment period.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each accusation and copy of a check;

1. Article 2(2) and Article 2(1) of the former Control of Illegal Check Act (amended by Act No. 10185, Mar. 24, 2010); and the choice of imprisonment, respectively, for criminal facts

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the Suspension of Execution (Considering circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects his mistake, the fact that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the fact that the defendant collected the check of default equivalent to the amount by endeavoring to recover the checks);