【The Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for habitual fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) on February 21, 2018, and on May 3, 2018, the Defendant had the same kind of criminal records as that of the same crime on May 3, 2018, including the completion of the execution of the sentence in the Dong House in Seoul East District Court.

[Criminal Facts]

1. On May 3, 2018, the Defendant did not have an intent or ability to pay the price even if he received food from the injured party on the grounds that there is no means to pay the price in cash other than KRW 2,390,00, and, on May 3, 2018, the Defendant ordered “E” restaurant operated by the injured party D, the victim D, who was in the Guro-si, to pay the food normally. The Defendant ordered 1 matization of hot water and 2 wals of small liquor and received food and drink equivalent to KRW 27,00 at the market price from the injured party.

2. The Defendant, on May 4, 2018, did not have an intent or ability to pay the price even if he received food from the injured party on the grounds that there was no means to pay the price in cash other than KRW 1,500,00, and, on May 4, 2018, ordered “H restaurant” operated by the Victim G located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, as if he would normally pay the cost of food. Around 1:00, the Defendant ordered “H restaurant” operated by the Victim G with the Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu, and received alcohol and food equivalent to KRW 27,00 at the market price from the injured party.

Accordingly, the defendant was habitually accused of victims and received property amounting to 54,000 won in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Written statements of D and G;

1. Previous records: Inquiry into criminal records and investigation reports (former records, court rulings, summary orders and confinement status);

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of each crime, the number of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the repeated crimes of the same kind in the judgment;

1. Articles 351 and 347 (1) of the Criminal Act relating to the facts constituting an offense;

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes is that the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is insignificant.