Since there is no particular property or profit, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the drinking value even if he received the drinking and the drinking in the danran bar.

Nevertheless,

1. On November 26, 2016, the Defendant: (a) 18:00 on November 26, 2016, (b) “E dan Dok-si” operated by the Victim D (FF) located in Doksan City (FF) “E Dok-si, as if he would pay the normal drinking value; and (c) was issued to the injured party a total of KRW 80,000,000, including 15 C C, etc.

2. On December 23, 2016, the Defendant: “Around 18:00, the victim G (n), located in the Hasan CityF, committed as if he would pay the normal drinking value at H Ga bar; and the Defendant received the Defendant, from the injured party, an alcoholic beverage and an alcoholic beverage amounting to KRW 225,000,00 in total, including 35 Byung (175,000,000).

3. On December 27, 2016, the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 120,000, totaling 20,000, from the injured party, in the “K Garan” operated by the Victim J (Y, 50 years of age) by the Defendant at Yasan City, as if he would pay the normal drinking value. The Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 120,00,00 in total from the injured party.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police made to G and J;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Invoice and photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (for repayment of alcoholic beverage value),

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes [the scope of recommending punishment] The basic area (from June to one year and six months) of Article 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes (the scope of recommending punishment] (the decision of sentencing from June to one year and six months) / In light of the fact that the defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime, it is inevitable to punish the defendant with severe punishment.

However, the fact that the defendant reflects his mistake, the amount of damage caused by the crime of this case is not much, and other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc.