On August 12, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for habitual fraud in the support of Suwon Frigwon, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on May 25, 2016.

On February 23, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 02:10, the victim D’s “E” operated by the victim D with C2 leveled C, and (b) even if having received alcoholic beverages from the victim, etc., the Defendant, despite the absence of the intent or ability to pay the said amount, issued orders for the payment of alcoholic beverages normally as if the victim would pay the amount of alcoholic beverages; and (c) the Defendant received an order for the payment of the amount equivalent to KRW 280,000,000 from the victim and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the said amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Receipts, on-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of crime records), investigation reports (verification of the date of release related to repeated crimes), application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning personal confinement;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud) and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Aggravation of Aggravation of Cumulative Offense Act not only has the record of having been punished several times for the same crime, but also, considering the fact that the defendant was sentenced for habitual fraud in the judgment and had been committed again during the period of repeated crime after the execution of the sentence was completed, and that the damage has not yet been restored, a sentence of punishment is inevitable.

However, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration all the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the degree of damage is not significant, the age, sex, family relationship, circumstances leading to the crime, etc. of the defendant.