Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final.

From January 11, 201, the Defendant entered into a check contract in the name of the new bank and the trading partner C from January 11, 201, with C as a person who operates Dart as a partner with C.

On September 20, 201, the Defendant issued, in collusion with C, one check number F, the date of issuance on December 7, 201, the par value of 45 million won per unit, one check number G, the date of issuance on November 20, 201, one check number per unit of 45 million won per unit, one check number H, the date of issuance on November 20, 201, one check number H, and one check number per unit of 45 million won per unit of dart C, each of which was issued on November 5, 201, respectively.

On October 19, 201, each holder of the check at issue during the period of presentment for payment (the check number F and G number of shares), and October 31, 201 (the check number H number of shares) presented the check to the above bank on October 31, 201 (the check number H number of shares), but the Defendant did not receive the check due to the suspension of transaction.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the second protocol of trial;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect by the police against C or I;

1. A copy of each unit number; and

1. Application of each statute on a written accusation;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Control of Illegal Check Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) of the Suspension of Execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) of the same Act (Article 62 (1) of the same Act (Article 62 (1) of the same Act (Article 62 of the same Act), the fact that there is no criminal record, the check of this case has been paid due to deception by a public-private day, and there are circumstances to consider the circumstances leading up to the crime; the Defendant has endeavored to recover the check by collecting more than 90% of the checks in default after the investigation; the check of this case was seized by provisional seizure