사기
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In relation to the case of Defendant (De facto Error) 2012 Godan805, K decided to grant a taxi fee to the victim C on behalf of the Defendant, and there was no intention to obtain fraud in the case of 2012 Godan1224.
B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment)’s sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one hundred and twenty hours of imprisonment, two years of probation, and alcohol treatment) is too uneased and unfair.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case [2012 Highest 805] around April 22, 2012, the Defendant, at around 20:30 on April 22, 2012, was boarding a D taxi operated by the victim C, and moved to the nearby F apartment via the Hancheon-si, Nowon-si E Apartment, Seoul Metropolitan Government.
However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the fee even after getting on or moving the above taxi.
Ultimately, the Defendant acquired approximately KRW 30,000 proprietary benefits from the victim.
[2012 Highest 1224] On July 15, 2012, the Defendant, at around 13:00, was boarding H taxi operated by the victim G and moved to the front of the J Hospital located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-gu I, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, as the Defendant would pay the taxi fee from the Bupyeong-gu, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Busan.
However, at the time, the defendant had no intention or ability to pay taxi charges to the victim even if he moves the victim's taxi due to the lack of money.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, used the taxi of the victim and did not pay 5,200 won of the taxi fee, thereby acquiring economic benefits equivalent to the same amount.
B. The lower court’s determination is insufficient to view that the testimony of the Witness K alone was a situation in which K could smoothly pay a taxi fee on behalf of the Defendant at the time of the instant case (2012 high group805). (In light of the evidence of the first instance judgment, the Defendant is free of charge, and the Defendant is free of charge.