The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, misjudgmenting facts, merely did not pay the taxi fee while engaging in a dispute with the victim, because the taxi fee is too much than the thought at the time of the instant case, and did not have the intention or ability to pay the taxi fee.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that he uses the taxi even though he did not have the intent or ability to pay the taxi fee as stated in the facts charged. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misconception of facts.

B. The lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (such as the fact that there is a large amount of letter, and the fact that a punishment should be determined by taking into account the equity between the public electromagnetic records, etc., in which the judgment became final and conclusive, and the case of the instant crime at the same time) and unfavorable circumstances (the fact that the Defendant’s crime is denied and does not oppose the Defendant on the grounds that it is difficult to obtain payment, such as misunderstanding the victim, even though the nature of the instant crime is pleasure, and that the Defendant’s act is confirmed to have the dual power of claiming two summary judgments on the free and without type similar to the instant crime), and there is no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence was

Furthermore, even though the defendant has a history of having been sentenced to imprisonment more than 10 times due to the crime of fraud, theft, etc., the defendant has a history of being sentenced to a fine several times due to the crime of fraud, the court below's punishment is too excessive even if it is considered that the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, etc. as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc.