A. As to each of the frauds in the case of 2014 Godan811 and 2014 Godan1880, each of the above facts, the defendant did not intend to pay the food cost from the beginning, but did not pay the food cost in a timely manner by failing to pay the victims' attitude. As to the frauds in the case of 2014 Godan180, the court below decided that Co-Defendant A would pay alcoholic beverages, and that Co-Defendant A would have caused a disturbance to do so. Therefore, even though the defendant did not have any criminal intent to obtain by deception, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, it is reasonable to view that the defendant had no ability to pay food costs objectively at the time of each crime in this part, and that the defendant had no intention to pay the price objectively, and that the defendant had no intention to pay the price. Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

① On March 27, 2014, the Defendant entered a restaurant operated by the Victim T to the effect that he requested the first time to make an unreasonable demand from the beginning, and made the said restaurant to the effect that he would not account for the said victim. The Defendant did not have expressed his intent to pay the price even after the dispatch by the police officer, and did not have cash at the time.

② On March 31, 2014, the Defendant: (a) entered a restaurant operated by the Victim AL; and (b) ordered food and drink without cash or credit card to take food and drink.

(The original judgment states this part of the victim as W, but it is a clerical error in the AL). (3)