beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On May 31, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud and crime of interference with business at the District Court, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on April 23, 2014.
"2014 Highest 1232"
1. On May 13, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 10:20, at the “Ecafeteria” operated by the victim D, in light of light-si, the Defendant: (b) committed as if he did not have any intent or ability to pay the food cost due to the lack of money in water; and (c) received from the victim a delivery of 19,000 won per share of the market price.
2. On May 14, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 00:00 to 01:20, at the “H restaurant” operated by the Victim G on the F and 1st floor of Lighting-si; (b) was committed as if the Defendant would have paid the food cost in spite of having no intent or ability to pay the food cost due to the lack of money in water; and (c) was issued from the victim the amount equivalent to KRW 29,00,000 in total of the market price; and (d) was issued from the victim the amount equivalent to KRW 29,00,0
"2014 Highest 1785"
1. At around 04:00 on May 16, 2014, the Defendant was provided with food and drink equivalent to KRW 21,000 in total on the job by the victim J in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the fact was committed as if the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the food cost, and was provided by the victim as if he did so.
2. On May 16, 2014, the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 16,000 in total on the spot by the victim M in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, and the fact was committed as if the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the drinking value, and was provided by the victim as if he were to pay the drinking value.
3. On May 17, 2014, the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 26,000 in total on the job by the victim P in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant was provided from the victim as if he did not have any intent or ability to pay the drinking value.
Summary of Evidence
1..