Around 08:40 on April 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) boarded the KTX train No. 604 of the TTX 10 of the Haak Station, without purchasing a legitimate boarding ticket in the Haak Station; and (b) when the said train is operating the area to be discharged from the Hansan Station-west Station, the Defendant stated that “the said train was stopped due to the lack of money; (c) the train crew C requested for the presentation of boarding tickets; (d) said, “the person who was demanded to send a ticket to the station because there is no money; and (d) said, “the Plaintiff transferred the ticket to the station to request the issuance of a new boarding ticket so that there is no money,” and said, the Defendant made a false statement as if the train would pay the fare.

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay train fares.

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving train crew C and continuing to board the train to be discharged from west; and (b) acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 8,500 from the following mountain to the discharge from west to west.

around 14:00 on April 28, 2014, the Defendant, “2014 Highest 2110,” was boarding a train on the 1,023 train in Seoul East-gu Saemaeul Lake 1, 1,023 without a legitimate boarding pass without having an intention or ability to pay the train fares.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by using the train ballot counting and gathering that the Korea Railroad Corporation did not confirm the possession of boarding tickets at the time of boarding for passenger convenience, deceiving the crew to check boarding tickets, and acquired the above train fare of KRW 8,000 from the section from the discharge to the Kimcheon Station to the area from the discharge to the discharge to the discharge.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement of D and E;

1. Application of the respective laws and regulations of C and F;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. From among concurrent crimes, it is reasonable to sentence sentence stated in the text, considering the fact that the reason for sentencing is not good and that there are many identical criminal records, among concurrent crimes, Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act.

It is so ordered as per Disposition for the reasons above.