The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, the drawer of the instant check, will pay the check money in favor of the FF in the lawsuit claiming the payment of the contract amount. Accordingly, the F may exercise the right to supplement the check and present payment until the said lawsuit becomes final and conclusive. Accordingly, the F may exercise the right to supplement the issue date of the instant check only after October 24, 2013, which is the date when the said lawsuit for the payment of the contract amount became final and conclusive.

Since the starting point of the extinctive prescription of the right to fill the blank is also considered to be after the date when the above judgment became final and conclusive, the lower court determined that the right to fill the blank exercised on or around September 20, 2013, when six months have passed after the completion of the extinctive prescription, and determined that the right to fill the blank exercised on or around September 2013, which stated the intention to refuse the transfer of the claim for the payment of construction price based on the text message sent by the Defendant to F, was not constituted a violation of the Illegal Check Control Act. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the right to fill the blank, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the right

2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant engaged in construction business from March 199 to November 30, 201 under the trade name “D” from Gunsan-si to Gunsan-si. From July 4, 2006, the Defendant entered into a check contract under the name of D (ownership) with the military viewing point of the Jeonbuk Bank and the Defendant’s operation.

On July 29, 2010, the Defendant issued a check number “G”, the check amount “this hundred million won”, and a statement of the number of shares per bank in the name of D (oil) in the name of the F office located in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

The defendant and F decided to supplement the date of issuance when the defendant can receive the construction cost after the completion of the construction work, but at the request of the defendant, H Co., Ltd.