A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On February 22, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on November 12, 201.

around 20:30 on February 26, 2013, the Defendant, “2013 Highest 798”, committed as if he would pay the normal drinking value to the victim D, who is located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and ordered the victim to provide alcohol and alcohol.

However, the Defendant did not have money, and there was no other means to pay the drinking value, and there was no intention or ability to pay the drinking value even if the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol from the victim.

The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim as above, was provided with 2 soldiers and 2 weeks per share in the aggregate amount of 340,000 won in the market value from the victim.

On March 12, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 02:50 on March 12, 2013, the Ghop house located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul; (b) the victim H (n, 40 years of age) on the side tables intended the Defendant’s parents; (c) thereby, the Defendant collected beer disease, which is a dangerous article on the table, and boomed the victim’s head on one occasion; (d) the victim’s head cannot be accurately identified.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to D or H by the police;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal history records, investigation reports (recognating repeated crimes);

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning a crime, and Articles 257 (1) and 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud);

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is not less than 28 times a criminal defendant, and the victim's damage has not been recovered.