The defendant did not have the intent and ability to pay the drinking value even if he drinks in an entertainment drinking club operated by the victim.

Nevertheless, around 00:10 on August 25, 2012, around 00:0, in the “D” operated by the victim C in the official city B, it ordered alcohol and alcohol as if it would pay the drinking value.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, took the same as two vaccination loans with 20 Macju and 2 Macju, but did not pay 340,000 won, such as drinking value and service fees, thereby gaining financial benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on simple receipts;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine concerning the crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.