When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On March 31, 2016, at around 11:37, the Defendant took the same attitude that he would normally pay the fare before the street of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and was boarding a C-si operated by the victim B.

However, because the defendant did not have cash or credit card, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the taxi fee to the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, caused the victim to operate a taxi from the street of the road to the Kimpo-Gongju located in the fire-fighting Dong in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and did not pay 3,600 won for the taxi fee, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on analysis of details of operations;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) 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;