Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. Although the defendant's act of misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles constitutes a legitimate act claiming a taxi fee that he did not receive, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant is recognized to have failed to receive a taxi fee from the injured party. However, according to the F and G’s legal statement in the lower court’s lower court, the Defendant was aware of the victim’s bitbitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch, and the Defendant expressed all of them. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

B. Although there are many penalties against the Defendant, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime, which was abandoned without paying the taxi fee after the time limit for the commission with the Defendant, there are circumstances to be considered in light of the circumstances; senior and health; the victim’s damage is relatively minor; while the Defendant did not receive the charge, the Defendant did not eventually receive the charge; and the Defendant did not receive the charge, and the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be unfair on account of various circumstances, such as the character, conduct, intelligence and environment of the Defendant, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with the conclusion, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged by the court and the summary of the evidence is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Therefore, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.