The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gu Government District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On August 27, 2002, the summary of the charge of the charge of the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act of the part concerning forgery of the check listed in Nos. 6 of the annexed Table 1 of the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “instant charge”) was forged on August 27, 2002 by stating at will the column of endorsers 1 of the number of units (BL of the Bank Branch Office B of the Gu) in the column of endorsers of the bill discount business office in Suwon-si, the bill discount business office in Suwon-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

2. The lower court, on the following grounds, found that even if an endorsement of a check was forged by taking advantage of another person’s name, the check constitutes a violation of Article 5 of the former Illegal Check Control Act (amended by Act No. 10185, Mar. 24, 2010; hereinafter “former Illegal Check Control Act”), and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged at issue.

Article 5 of the former Illegal Check Control Act provides that a person who forges a check shall be punished, but does not specify it as a forgery on the issuance of a check.

Securities act that is endorsed on a check is also important securities act related to the possibility of payment of the check, so the authenticity of the check should be protected.

Article 2 (Criminal Responsibility of Issuer of Illegal Check) of the former Control of Illegal Check Act is interpreted to be subject to punishment for the person prepared in addition to the person who has issued the illegal check, and only the person who has issued it shall be punished.

The Illegal Check Control Act was enacted for the purpose of punishing more strictly than the forgery of other securities in order to secure the importance as a means of circulation and transaction of checks.

Article 5 of the former Illegal Check Control Act does not stipulate the basic securities act and incidental securities act, and it can be said that if a person who is not authorized under the language and text prepares a document, it can be said that the document is forged.

Article 214 of the Criminal Code, which is a general corporation, concerning the issuance of securities by dividing them.