However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

From January 26, 1995, the Defendant entered into a check contract with Switzerland Bank, and traded household checks.

On July 30, 2014, the Defendant issued one copy of the bank household check in the name of the Defendant, “C” office in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul operated by the Defendant, whose check number “C” appears to be a clerical error of “A”; hereinafter the same shall apply. D, “D”, “5,00,000 won”, “date of issuance”, and “the said bank household check in July 30, 2014” and presented a payment proposal to the said bank on July 30, 2014 during the period of presentment for payment, but did not receive a deposit shortage.

In addition, the Defendant issued eight copies of the above bank's household check in the name of the Defendant from around that time to August 9, 2014 under the name of the Defendant from around that time to around that time, as indicated in the attached list of crimes committed by the Defendant, and each of the holders presented a payment proposal to the above bank within the period of payment proposal, but did not pay each of them for the shortage of deposit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Certificate of closure;

1. Application of each statute on a written accusation;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Control of Illegal Check Control Act with Respect to the facts constituting an offense and Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Act on the Selection of Penalties;

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 (a favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act obstructs the distribution of checks by allowing the Defendant to not pay them on the presented date after issuing each of the coefficient marks of this case. However, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the following factors: (a) the total face value of eight copies of each of the household checks of this case is 40 million won; (b) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment; (c) the Defendant appears to have been making efforts to recover the checks; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct