If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

At around 13:00 on July 4, 2013, the Defendant stated that, within the victim’s C-cab parked in front of the Chungcheongnam-gu Chungcheongnam-gu Chungcheong District, Cheongju-si, the Defendant would pay taxi charges, and that, “I would pay 150,000 won of taxi charges if I would go to Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, and I would go to the victim.”

However, the fact was false, although the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the taxi fee as agreed above.

Accordingly, the defendant deceiving the victim, caused the victim to board the defendant, and caused the victim to drive the taxi like the above requirements of the defendant, and failed to pay the taxi fee of 150,000 won, which was promised, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of the police protocol protocol law to B

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;