A. The Defendant: (a) misunderstanding of fact, after having been contacted by drinking E, did not possess a card or cash; and (b) while drinking, E could not pay the amount without any choice to leave the house.

Therefore, the defendant did not have any intention to commit a crime with no previous eating at the time.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 50,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can be acknowledged that he did not pay a value without justifiable reasons after eating food sold by another person. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1) On May 19, 2016, the Defendant received contact from E, I, etc. and visited D cafeteria operated by the victim C in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu.

2) On the first day, the Defendant first started to the above restaurant, and the Defendant selected the place as the above restaurant and identified all E in the order of Qua New Daily.

At the time, E first contacted with the defendant, and tried to calculate the drinking value by making a few times in the peace.

However, there was no clear period for the defendant to calculate E's drinking value.

3) However, E, while drinking alcohol, went to the toilet by taking a large number of alcohol, and treats the Defendant, and starts from the taxi to get on and off the taxi without having the Defendant speaked first, and left the restaurant above the Defendant, regardless of other kinds of driving.

4) The Defendant could not pay the food and drinking value because he thought that E has paid the drinking value, and the Defendant was in a restaurant with a simple tea without having credit card and money.

The injured party shall be the defendant.