A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 19, 2015, at around 15:00, the Defendant, despite having been provided with alcohol or alcohol at the “EM” for the victim’s operation on the first floor of Songpa-gu Seoul underground, Songpa-gu Seoul underground, the Defendant, despite having no intention or ability to pay the price, took an attitude that the Defendant would pay the alcohol value, and ordered the alcohol or alcohol. The Defendant, upon receiving the victim’s order from the victim, obtained 10 salkju equivalent to the sum of KRW 190,000 in the market value.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of probation and community service order Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and the defense counsel’s assertion, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder due to the existence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, etc., and the record reveals that according to the record, the Defendant was diagnosed with the existence of alcohol in 2009, and was hospitalized as a mental and behavioral disorder due to alcohol use from May 25, 2015. However, the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime.

The defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted as it seems to be in a state or weak condition.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Where the sentencing criteria [the range of recommendations] set forth in the category 1 (less than 100 million won) and the mitigation area (one month to one year) (special mitigation), the punishment of a person who has been set aside, or considerable damage has been recovered;

2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and agreed with the victim is favorable to the Defendant, but the Defendant, on January 24, 2013, committed the same criminal act even after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in October, 2013, by committing the same criminal act even after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years.