logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.01.13 2015고단1343
부정수표단속법위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged is that from February 21, 2005, the Defendant entered into a check contract in the name of the other original branch of the Jeju Bank and the Defendant, and traded over the check.

1. On March 20, 2015, the Defendant issued one copy of the check number “E”, the check amount “22,30,000 won”, and the check date on April 21, 2015 under the name of the Defendant, which was named as “E”, “2,30,000 won”, at D offices located in C at Jeju, and the Defendant offered the check on April 21, 2015, which was within the period for presentation, and the Defendant did not pay for the shortage of deposits.

2. On January 15, 2015, the Defendant issued one copy of the check number “H”, “40,000,000” at the “G hotel” coffee shop located in F at the Jeju-si, and the Defendant issued one check at the Defendant’s name as of April 29, 2015 as of the date of issuance, and presented the check on April 29, 2015, which is within the period for presentation, and the Defendant did not pay for the shortage of deposits.

Maz.

1. The collection of the check or the exemption from punishment (the part on the charge No. 1 shall be punished on December 23, 2015, and the part on paragraph 2 shall be recovered on October 3, 2015);

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 2(2) and (4) of the Illegal Number Control Act, Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Litigation Act and above.

arrow