A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months and by imprisonment for eight months.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

Defendant

A is the representative director of corporation E (hereinafter referred to as “instant company”) located in the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu D2, and Defendant B is the person who actually operates the instant company.

[2] From July 10, 2013, the Defendant opened and issued a check of foreign exchange bank circulation and current deposit account in the name of the instant company from July 10, 2013.

On May 16, 2014, the Defendant issued the check number “F”, “14,586,000 won”, “14,586,000 won”, and “date of issuance” in the name of the instant company as indicated in attached Table 1, and issued KRW 49,82,100 in total face value as indicated in attached Table 1 from July 25, 2014 to July 25, 2014.

However, the Defendant presented the check within the period of presentment for payment, but did not pay the check for the shortage of deposit.

As a result, the defendant did not pay on the date of payment proposal after issuing a deposit slip.

[2] From July 10, 2013, the Defendants entered into a watch agreement with the foreign exchange bank in the name of the Defendant Company A around July 10, 2013, and the Defendants conspired to issue a check and use the check.

Accordingly, around April 8, 2014, the Defendants issued one copy of check number G, face value 14,080,000, and date of issuance in the name of the instant company as of October 15, 2014, at the office of the instant company, and issued one copy of the check number per unit number in the name of the instant company as of October 15, 2014, and provided that the said check was presented for payment to the said bank on October 15, 2014 during the period for which the holder of the said check presented payment, but did not receive payment for reasons such as non-transaction

7. Until January 1, 200, it issued and paid KRW 44,680,000 per share as shown in the attached Table 2 of the daily list of crimes, and the sum of face value.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to issue three copies of the number of units, and they are the holders.