[2] The case holding that, as the Swiss currency, the pneumoconiosis which had been used by the year 198 as the Swiss currency but is not currently widely used, but which can be exchanged with new currency at the Swiss Bank does not constitute a foreign currency "in circulation" in a country under Article 207 (2) of the Criminal Act

[3] Whether the crime of uttering of forged currency is established in a case where a counterfeited currency is delivered to a person who knows that it is a forged currency (affirmative)

[2] The case holding that the Switzerland currency used as the Switzerland currency by 1998 but not currently used, but the pneumoconiosis which can be exchanged with new currency at the Switzerland bank does not constitute a foreign currency "distribution in the country" under Article 207 (2) of the Criminal Code

[3] In a case where a counterfeited currency is delivered to a person who knows that it is a counterfeited currency, if the delivery was made by the recipient with the expectation or awareness that it would be distributed, the act of delivery itself would pose a risk of undermining the public trust or transaction safety of the currency, and therefore, the crime of uttering of fake currency is established

Unlike the "use in common" of Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 3 of Article 207 of the Criminal Code, the term "distribution in a country" refers to a state in which it is actually a means of payment for transaction without forced circulation.

The court below acknowledged the fact that the pneumoconiosis of the Swiss currency that the defendants exercised or acquired was able to conduct general commercial transactions in Switzerland by 1998 in the Republic of Korea, and it is currently not currently used. However, it is possible to exchange new currency from Switzerland banks until April 30, 2020, and it also becomes us to exchange new currency in Korea and therefore it is possible for foreign tourists to use it as payment means for goods in Korea. Thus, even if the pneumoconiosis of Switzerland currency of this case can be exchanged at domestic banks in Korea, it is not a payment means, but it is merely similar to the goods of the foreign exchange transaction in order to gain profits equivalent to the difference between the sale price and the purchase price, and it is not reasonable to view that it was used as payment means in Switzerland and other tourist destinations, but it cannot be viewed as a sale means in the same way as that of the bank in this case without calculating it as a certain exchange rate between tourists and merchants, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as seen above.

2. Judgment on the Defendants’ grounds of appeal

The decision of the court below that recognized that the Swiss currency of this case acquired or transferred by the defendants falls under the Switzerland currency prohibited from entry and exit under Article 234 subparagraph 3 of the Customs Act and applied the defendants' act as a violation of the Customs Act is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the rules of evidence, the violation of the rules of evidence, the processing of commercial concurrent crimes, or the "cash counterfeited goods" under the Customs Act, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the court below's measure that recognized Defendant 1's act as a counterfeited currency of this case, and imposed the above defendant's act as a crime of forging currency acquisition is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

If the delivery of forged currency to a person who is aware of the fact that it is a counterfeited currency was made and the delivery was made by the recipient with the expectation or awareness that it would be distributed, the act of delivery itself constitutes a crime of uttering of forged currency, as there is a risk of undermining the public confidence and security of transaction.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the exercise of forged currency.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)