On October 30, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months at the Jeju District Court for fraud, etc., and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on November 7, 2014, and is still under suspension of execution.

On February 8, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 01:30, the Defendant, at the main point of the management of the victim D in Seogpopo City C, did not have any intent or ability to pay the drinking value; (b) did not appear to pay the drinking value; and (c) ordered the victim to pay the drinking value.

As a result, the defendant was provided with a total amount of 320,000 won from the victim, and acquired property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Relevant photographs and receipts;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (attached reports, such as judgments on criminal acts of the same kind as a suspect), and statutes;

1. The relevant provisions of the criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the selection of punishment, the scope of sentencing guidelines on the grounds for sentencing of sentencing of imprisonment with prison labor [the range of sentence [the crime group, general fraud, type 1 (less than KRW 100 million), the basic area, six-month to June], and the following circumstances are considered: The circumstances favorable to the determination of punishment as stated in the order: recognizing the facts of the crime and reflecting it; recognizing the facts of the crime; recognizing the defrauded amount as a small amount of KRW 320,00 won; taking into account the fact that the defrauded amount is a small amount of KRW 320,00 won; and taking into account the fact that the crime of this case is disadvantageous to the mental retardation: there has been a history of punishment twice due to a crime of fraud (the fine-type and the one time suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor) on October 30, 2014; the judgment was finalized on November 7, 2014; and committing the crime of this case under the same Act of this case.

The fact that the crime is not good, and the damage is not recovered, unlike the general intangible forms due to economic difficulties that have been obtained by defraudation of high-priced share, etc. at the main point: the age, character and conduct of the defendant.