When the crime of violation of Article 2 (2) of the Illegal Check Control Act is established

The crime of violation of Article 2 (2) of the Illegal Check Control Act is established when the drawer issues a check, predicting the occurrence that the check will not be paid on the date of presentation due to the shortage of deposit, and the check holder's presentation of a supplementary statement is not established when the check holder refuses to pay the check on the date of presentation.

Article 2 (2) of the Illegal Check Control Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Do2623 Decided September 25, 1979

Defendant

Prosecutor

Gwangju District Court Decision 85No344 delivered on August 2, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The judgment of the court below is justified in holding that the crime of violation of Article 2 (2) of the Illegal Check Control Act is established at the time when the issuer issues a check, predicting the occurrence that the crime will not be paid on the date of presentation due to the shortage of deposits. The crime is not established when the check holder issues a check with a supplementary entry of the date of issuance, and the payment of the check is refused on the date of presentation, but it cannot be said that there is a misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court of the first instance that the period of prescription begins from the date of the above issuance (see Supreme Court Decision 78Do2623, Sept. 25, 1979). It is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Illegal Check Control Act

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeon Soo-soo (Presiding Justice)