The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the defendant was not able to pay the taxi cost, but there was no intention to obtain the taxi by fraud.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of fraud. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On June 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 01:38, the summary of the facts charged of fraud: (b) boarded the victim E in a F-business taxi operated by the victim E in the street room located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and had the victim operate the F-business taxi to the G-gu station as if he would pay a reasonable fee to the victim.

However, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay taxi charges from the beginning, and on the same day, the Defendant did not have any money to the 1180-mast calendar calendars in Seocho-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, the purpose of which is at around 02:10 on the same day, and did not pay 39,760 won of taxi charges.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired financial benefits equivalent to the above taxi charges.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by compiling the evidence in its judgment.

(c)

1) The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of a crime of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details and details of the crime before and after the crime, and the process of transaction execution, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession. Meanwhile, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value to lead the judge to feel true that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a doubt about the Defendant’s guilt, it is inevitable to determine the Defendant’s profit, and this also recognizes the criminal intent which is a subjective element of a crime of fraud.