On December 17, 2013, the defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for fraud in the Suwon District Court's Ansan Branch for a period of suspension of execution and is currently under suspension of execution.

On April 2, 2014, the Defendant stated that “I would pay the drinking value upon receipt of monthly pay” at the D subject point of the operation of the victim C in Sititu City B.

However, in fact, the defendant had already received provisional payments exceeding KRW 10 million from the company that he attends, and even if he has received monthly payments, he did not have the ability to pay the liquor price to the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, obtained the victim’s alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 8.10,00 from that time, from that time, through which the Defendant received the victim’s alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 8.10,00,00 from that time, until April 28, 2014, by obtaining the Defendant’s 10,000 as stated in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Sales slips;

1. Investigation reports (to hear statements in E);

1. Previous convictions: Criminal history records and other inquiries; criminal records; criminal records; criminal records; criminal records of investigation reports; criminal records of sentencing under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, applicable to the law, have been sentenced to a fine even though they had not been aware of the same kind of crime during the period of suspension of execution due to the same criminal records; however, criminal records of the fine have been committed for the purpose of amusement only once again.

Although damage is relatively weak, considering the above circumstances, more preference such as fines, etc. is likely to be contrary to equity and will not help prevent recidivism, and such damage has not been completely recovered and there is no material to deem that the defendant made a serious effort for the recovery of damage, the sentence as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the factors of sentencing indicated in the record.