logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2013.03.25 2012고단2938
부정수표단속법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From December 17, 1993, the Defendant opened a check account with a branch office and a current account in the name of the Defendant from December 17, 1993, and traded checks.

around July 10, 2012, the Defendant issued 10,000,000 won of household checks as shown in the attached crime list, including one sheet of check number D, and one sheet of face value 5,000,000 won, at the office of the C company operated by the Defendant of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “C company”) around July 10, 2012. However, the Defendant issued checks at the C office operated by the Defendant of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, including one sheet of check number D, and one sheet of face value 2,00,000 won as indicated in the attached crime list. However, the Defendant issued checks at around August 10, 2012, 200 won for lack of deposit or non-transaction. The Defendant issued checks at the C office operated by the Defendant of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul, on August 10, 2012.

However, although the holder of the check presented payment within the time limit for presentment of payment, he did not pay the shortage of deposit.

The main sentence is 1 E 5 million won, such as the actual date of issuance of a check number per face value.

2 Omitted (Revocation of Public Prosecution) "2013 Highest 176"

1. Omitted;

2. On September 20, 2012, around September 20, the Defendant issued one copy of the check under the name of the Defendant, which is the check number “F,” the check amount “5,00,000,000,” and the date of issuance “F,” at the office of the Defendant Company C in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul’s operation.”

On December 21, 2012, the holder of the check presented the check payment to the bank.

However, the Defendant did not pay the suspension of transaction or the termination of the check contract.

3. Summary of omitted evidence;

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each statute on a written accusation;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Control of Illegal Check Act applicable to a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse.

arrow