logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.12.10 2013고단569
부정수표단속법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From October 17, 2006, the Defendant entered into a check contract in the name of the gold village branch of the National Bank and C (State) whose representative is the Defendant from October 17, 2006, and made transactions on the check number.

On August 27, 2011, the Defendant issued one check number “E”, check amount “8,00,000,000”, and issuance date “C” under the name of the Defendant’s office located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do, and one check number per bank.

On December 30, 201, the holder of the check presented the payment order within the period of presentment for payment.

However, the defendant did not receive the suspension of transaction.

In addition, the Defendant, from August 201 to September 7, 2011, issued five copies of the check number per five times in the same manner as shown in the first list of crimes in attached Form 1, from around August 201 to September 7, 2011, and the said check holder presented the check payment proposal within the period of payment presentation, but the check holder did not receive each of the disposition of suspension of transaction.

From October 17, 2006, the Defendant entered into a check contract in the name of the Franchising branch of the National Bank and C (States) whose representative is the Defendant, and entered into a check contract in the number of shares.

On July 18, 2011, the Defendant issued one check number “F”, “37,00,000,000,” and one check number per bank in the name of the Defendant’s office located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do, and the date of issuance “C” as of November 10, 201.

On November 10, 201, the holder of the check presented the payment order within the period of presentment for payment.

However, the defendant did not receive the suspension of transaction.

In addition, from July 18, 201 to October 27, 2011, the Defendant issued 11 copies of the check by the same method over 11 occasions as shown in the second list of crimes in attached Form 2, and even though the check holders proposed to pay the check within the period for presentation of payment, they did not receive the suspension of transaction.

arrow