A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal record] On October 26, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud in the Gwangju District Court’s wooden Branch, and completed the enforcement of the sentence on May 8, 2018.

[Criminal facts]

1. On June 12, 2018, the Defendant interfered with his/her duties: (a) in the “E cafeteria” operated by the victim D in Franchising C on June 12, 2018; and (b) in the forward table after having taken the place, the Defendant may singestly f, a restaurant customer, who is the above restaurant, with a large sound.

The Defendant spits spiting the 40-minutes of the Defendant’s table on the Defendant’s table, and expressed the f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’, and obstructed the Defendant’s restaurant business by avoiding the 40-minutes of the Defendant’s f’s f’s f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s daily f’s bat, and by taking the Defendant’s table into the Defendant’s f

2. The criminal defendant committed the act as if he did not have the intention or ability to pay the drinking value, while he did not have the intention or ability to pay the drinking value, and he was provided with the alcohol and food equivalent to the sum of 14,500 won from the above victim, and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F or D;

1. Receipts:

1. Records of judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (verification of suspect repeated records) statute;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud) and the choice of imprisonment, respectively, for the crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes is that the defendant confessions and reflects the instant crime, and the amount obtained by deceit of the fraudulent crime is a small amount and repaid.

However, the defendant not only has a lot of history of criminal punishment for the same crime, but also has not yet passed since he/she was sentenced to punishment for the same crime and completed the execution of the sentence.