logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2011.05.20 2011노273
부정수표단속법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the audit report on the financial statements from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 of H (hereinafter “H”) that the Defendant was the representative director, Defendant 1 was guilty of the Defendant, even though the Defendant did not recognize that the net income of H was KRW 1,379,174,629, and the Defendant did not pay the check amount on the check payment date on July 21, 2006, since the Defendant issued the check of this case, the lower court convicted the Defendant. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The instant check was issued in order to secure H’s indemnity liability for the Korea Housing Guarantee Insurance (hereinafter “Korea Housing Guarantee”) due to the Defendant’s performance of the reconstruction apartment, and the time when the Korea Housing Guarantee, the guarantor, was entitled to exercise the right of reimbursement, can be seen as the time the remaining construction works were to be carried out in the way of succession execution. Since the Jeonju District Court rendered a decision to abolish the rehabilitation of H on July 17, 2009, at least around July 18, 2009, the said decision could supplement the issue date and the face value of the instant check, which is the blank part of the check, as the next day.

The court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that the check of this case, the issue date and face value of which were supplemented on March 30, 2010 after the lapse of the statute of limitations, was supplemented after the expiration of the period for filling blanks. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the starting point of the statute of limitations for filling blanks, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the amount of the instant check paid by the prosecutor is large to approximately 12.5 billion won, that the Defendant is not against the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not agree with the victim, the sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

arrow