A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one month.

Punishment of the crime

On May 17, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Illegal Check Control Act at the Suwon District Court on May 17, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 22, 2019.

On February 22, 2019, the Defendant purchased a local copy machine at the C store located in Daegu-gu, Seocheon-gu, Daegu-gu, and forged eight cashier's checks issued by F issuance in the way of copying the cashier's checks in front and back of the E representative director's checks issued on February 22, 2019, including "D", "5,00,000 won for checks", "6,00 won for checks", and "6,000 for checks issued" on February 22, 2019.

around 18:00 on February 23, 2019, the Defendant purchased one and one half of 200 knives from 1,50 knives of the victim G management in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant issued one of the above knives’s cashier’s checks, as if the Defendant were a genuine check, to the victim who is unaware of the forgery of the check in terms of the price for the goods, and was issued the above knives and halfs.

Accordingly, the suspect was issued property by exercising forged cashier's checks and deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. A forged check;

1. Investigation report ( telephone communications-seller of precious metals); and

1. Two copies of the judgment; and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (verification of cases of ex post concurrent crimes), written judgments, summary agreements and auxiliary meetings of cases, and the current status of confinement of individuals;

1. Articles 217 and 214 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Of concurrent offenders, the fact that there was no recovery of damage caused by the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among those concurrent offenders, the fact that the reason for sentencing was unfavorable, the time and reflects, all of the criminal facts were stated to the extent that they were aware of at the time of the investigation of the final judgment, and all of the criminal facts of this case were tried together with