except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

From July 21, 1995, the defendant entered into a check contract with the main office of the national bank and the defendant from July 21, 1995, and entered into a check contract under the name of the defendant.

around March 10, 2014, the Defendant issued a check number C and a check number “C” and “5,000,000 won per bank under the name of the Defendant as of June 10, 2014 on which the check was issued”, and issued a check on June 10, 2014, when the check holder offered payment of the check on June 10, 2014 during the period for which the check was issued, the check holder did not pay the shortage of deposits, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes Day, and the Defendant did not pay KRW 14,68,286,200 over 14 occasions, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes Day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each statute on a written accusation;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Control of Illegal Check Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Act on the Control of Illegal Check which enables

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, which was issued by the Defendant and presented for payment by the Defendant, does not reach a number of 68,286,200 won in the total face value per share sheet as long as the Defendant did not receive any shortage of deposit. However, in light of all the circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, including the following: (a) the Defendant committed a crime for 20 years; (b) the Defendant operated the lux board while committing a crime; (c) the Defendant committed a crime due to managerial difficulties; (d) two victims, who were supplied with lux oil after receiving the check number sheet from the Defendant, were returned about KRW 15,60,00 after paying the check; (c) the Defendant was not subject to a fine only once; (d) the Defendant was not subject to a prior conviction; (e) the Defendant’s character, conduct and environment of the Defendant; (e) the background and result of the instant crime; and