On December 11, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence in a female prison on March 3, 2014.

1. The Defendant from around 04:26 on March 7, 2014 to the same year.

3. From 20:00 to 20:00, the facts in the “EPC” operated by the victim D in Ischeon-si, showed the same attitude that the victim would pay the price by using a computer or not having the intent or ability to pay the price even if having used the computer or ordered food, and used the computer for about 136 hours, and received the order for food, and thereby, the victim received property benefits or goods equivalent to the sum of KRW 183,000 from the victim.

2. The Defendant from around 09:25 on March 14, 2014 to the same year.

3. From October 10:00, the facts in the “HP bank” operated by the victim G in Echeon-si (F) showed the same attitude that the victim would use a computer or would not have an intent or ability to pay the price even if the order was issued, and the victim would have used the computer for about 73 hours, and would have been ordered to pay the price to the victim. If the two were to use it for about 73 hours, then the victim would have received economic benefits or goods equivalent to the sum of 107,400 won from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Before and after the police statements concerning D and G: Criminal records, investigation reports (former and previous judgments, attached thereto, and court rulings), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the status of confinement/taking by individuals;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reasons under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

Despite the fact that the punishment of the same kind of criminal act as the sentencing was 40 times or more, it has not yet been discharged from the court, and therefore, it again leads to the crime of this case.