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

The defendant is a person who works on a daily basis at the construction site.

On July 25, 2013, at around 21:10, the Defendant: (a) taken a cab in front of the Seo-gu Office in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, and (b) made a victim-based taxi driver C to believe that he/she had no intent or ability to pay a taxi fee, and (c) made him/her believe that he/she would reduce a taxi fee, and (d) he/she would have no taxi fee upon arrival in the destination at around 21:20 on the same day; (b) thereby, he/she became aware that there was no taxi fee; and (c) 3,500 won (or 11,600 won if included in the atmosphere) was exempted from the payment of the taxi fee.

B. On July 25, 2013, at around 21:25, the Defendant: (a) compared to the victim C who was in order to deal with the instant case related to the said “A” and the case related to the said “A” within the Gwangju Northern Police Station D District; (b) compared to the prosecution, the Defendant initially judged the victim C, who was in order to have dealt with the instant case, and was in fluencing the said case, and (c) compared to flusium, flusium, flusium, flusium, and flusium, flusium, flusium, and openly insulting the victim for about 30 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reports (Investigation records 36,37 pages);

1. Article 347 (1) and Article 311 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.