Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On July 13, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment for fraud at the Incheon District Court on March 17, 2013, and completed the enforcement of the sentence. At around 23:00 on June 11, 2013, “E operated by the victim DD in Gyeonggi-gun Co., Ltd.”, the Defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to the amount of the said amount by receiving the victim’s profits equivalent to the sum of the said amount of the said amount of money, even if the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol, but did not have the intent or ability to pay the said amount even if he was unable to pay the said amount, the Defendant ordered the victim to pay the said amount of money.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement made to D by the police;
1. An invoice of the drinking value;
1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal history records, investigation reports (reports on attachment of written judgments and confirmation of the fact of release from the court), personal identification and confinement status;
1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders has reached the meeting from around August 2010 that the defendant was punished for infinite fraud. In particular, it is inevitable to punish the defendant with severe punishment in light of the fact that the defendant committed a crime during the suspended execution period, not only because the defendant committed a crime on August 27, 201 by having been sentenced to two years of imprisonment for the same type of fraud, etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court on August 19, 201, which was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on August 27, 2011 and was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on the ground that the defendant committed a crime during the suspended execution period, not on the ground that the defendant committed a crime for the purpose of amusement, such as distribution and pain.
However, the fact that the crime of this case is only one time and the amount of fraud is not so big, and the defendant is divided and reflected.