The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as indicated in the facts charged, did not sell a large quantity of food within a short time, as stated in the facts charged, and paid the amount to the victim either directly or after 3-5 days, was an intention or ability to pay the amount at the time of the instant crime.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination 1 on the assertion of mistake of facts) Although the Defendant made a confession of all the facts constituting the crime in the original judgment in the court of original instance, the Defendant denies it by re-afusing it in the first instance trial.

Therefore, according to the records, the defendant's credibility of a confession made in the court of the court below cannot be found to be objectively unreasonable or contradictory to the circumstances other than the confession, and there was a situation where the defendant only suspected of having no voluntariness of confession due to the reasons prescribed in Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Act, or to have a reasonable doubt in the motive or process of confession.

There is no evidence to determine the person.

Therefore, there is credibility that confessions made in the court of the court below by the defendant are consistent with the truth.

It is reasonable to view it.

2) Next, we examine whether there is evidence of reinforcement as to the confession of the defendant.

The lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the victims, at the police station around April 22, 2015, found the Defendant in a restaurant on each day, as indicated in the facts charged, and did not pay the amount until the time of investigation, even though the Defendant ordered food as indicated in the facts charged.

Since each of the above statements was made without any contradiction and there is no reason to make a statement unfavorable to the defendant differently from the facts, the credibility of each of the above statements is recognized, and the defendant is also the side of the place of business and the pre-sale table in which some of the victims are recorded.