The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that false statements as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below, such as the defendant's statement, are unrelated to the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act against C and the violation of the charge on the exercise of forged securities. However, around July 23, 2010, although the defendant issued two copies of the household check in blank and allowed C to use the check at a discount, the issuer's column, and even though the issuer approved C to use the check at a discount, it is necessary to give C with false statements that there is no such fact. The defendant's belief that the above household check's face value column, the date of issuance, and the issuer's seal to supplement the above household check's face value column, the date of issuance, and the issuer's seal and the exercise of it also constitutes acts without the defendant's permission, and thus, it seems that the above act constitutes forgery of checks and the use of forged securities, and thus, it is necessary to give C a warning to the defendant that has already been subject to punishment for the same kind of crime.

However, the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect all of the crimes of this case in the trial, and according to the "Recording" duly adopted and investigated in the trial of the political party, the defendant is bound by separate detention, and the circumstances in which the recovery of household checks delivered to C via L is properly observed, and the facts charged as to the defendant's violation of the Illegal Check Control Act and the exercise of forged securities against C have become final and conclusive, even if the defendant's perjury has been convicted of not guilty, the defendant bears the large father who is going against his wife and marriage, and the small woman's living expenses in a graduate school, and is currently subject to the whole-out thereafter.