Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, and a fine of 5,000,000 won.

The defendant above.

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Article 2 of the facts charged in the judgment of the court Decree No. 1), the Defendant was delegated with general and comprehensive authority to prepare household checks as stated in this part of the facts charged. The court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (No. 1: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and June of one year and a fine of 2,00,000, and fine of 2: fine of 5,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court of appeal ex officio, the appeal case against the judgment below was combined, and each crime of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38 of the Criminal Act. Thus, each of the judgment below is no longer maintained.

However, even in this case, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following circumstances revealed by the court below, i.e., the victim consistently adopted and investigated by the investigating agency to request documents necessary for the establishment of a legal entity by the victim, and stated that the defendant is merely in charge of the above documents and was not delegated with authority to issue a family check, because the victim is in charge of credit cards, household checks, and seal impressions, etc., and that the defendant did not delegate his/her authority to issue a family check. At the time of preparing a written complaint, the victim filed a complaint only against the non-performing household check due to the victim's lack of knowledge of how the Defendant issued the family check at the time of the preparation of the written complaint.

A statement is made by the Defendant, and the Defendant is free of charge from November 25, 2013 to April 30, 2014 without the consent of the victim.