beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On August 30, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of 6 months and a fine of 3 million won in the Ulsan District Court for fraud, etc. and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 7, 2013.
The Defendant, around 02:30 on August 12, 2013, sent the same attitude to pay the taxi fee to the victim C-si operated by the victim B in return for the late payment of the taxi fee. On the other hand, the Defendant had the victim operate the taxi to the vicinity of the new industrial tower in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu.
However, the defendant did not have cash and did not have any other means of payment such as credit cards, so there was no intention or ability to pay the price.
The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, did not pay KRW 5,00 to the victim with the taxi fee of KRW 5,00, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Application of the police protocol protocol law to B
1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;
1. The latter part of Articles 37 and 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes (mutual crimes, such as fraud in this case and fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive);
1. Article 57 of the Criminal Act including days of pre-trial detention;
1. The sentence as set forth in the Disposition shall be determined by taking into account equity in the case of a judgment, the economic situation of the defendant and health conditions, etc. when the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the fact that the crime of this case was committed again during the appellate trial after being convicted of fraud, etc. under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, and that the crime of this case was committed again during the appellate trial.