According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the check of this case was issued under the circumstances indicated in its holding, it cannot be a transfer of the right on the check, it is merely a simple collection delegation act, and it was issued for the purpose of coordinating the coefficient of the check Daejeon between the creditor bank as stated in the judgment of the court below and deposited into the account of the other victims even if the check of this case was not paid on the date of presentation due to the shortage of deposit. This cannot be deemed to be an issuance of the illegal check as stipulated in Article 2 (2) of the Illegal Check Control Act. In addition, since the check of this case was issued in trust and issued by the defendant, it cannot be said that the check of this case would be presented at the time of its issuance, and it could not be expected that the check would not be presented on the date of its issuance would result in the non-payment. It is clear that the facts charged of this case is not guilty on the ground that there was no proof of crime.

However, in light of the legislative intent of the Illegal Check Control Act and the punishment for the issuance of the illegal Check Control Act, and the fact that the check of this case was issued under the circumstances stated in the judgment of the court below, if it was not paid due to the lack of deposit or other reasons, it cannot be deemed as the issuance of the illegal Check as stipulated in Article 2 of the Illegal Check Control Act, and even if the defendant and the defendant believed the horses on the south-west Branch of the Bank of Korea, such as the time of original inquiry and issued the check of this case, the record does not deem that the defendant issued the check of this case with the knowledge that if the check of this case was presented for payment, it would cause the result of non-payment, and therefore, it shall be deemed that the check of this case issued by the defendant is an illegal check as stipulated in the Illegal Check Control Act, and therefore, it shall be deemed that the responsibility for such issuance should be held, and therefore, it shall be difficult to prove that the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime, thereby affecting the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, this appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)