A. The Defendant had no intention to commit the crime since misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles obtained F’s permission, which appears to be the manager of the house indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant house”), and entered the said house.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principles and the misapprehension of the legal principles on the assertion of mistake of facts is that the crime of intrusion of residence is the benefit and protection of the peace of de facto residence, so whether the resident or manager has the right to reside or manage the building, etc. does not depend on the establishment of the crime, and even if the resident or manager is permitted to enter a normal building due to the relationship with the resident or manager, if the act of entering the residence is committed even though it is against the resident or manager's explicit or presumed intent, then the crime of intrusion of residence is established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2595, Aug. 23, 2007). 2) The judgment of the court below also asserted that the defendant is the same as the reason for appeal in this part, and the court below found the defendant guilty of the

In addition to the circumstances properly explained by the lower court, the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant sent a text message to the victim C on September 2017, asking the victim C whether or not the Defendant was entering the said house for the actual survey of the instant house, but did not receive any answer from the said victim. ② Nevertheless, the Defendant sought the instant house on September 16, 2017, and the Defendant did not confirm the victim’s intention again by means of telephone, etc., even if the report on the correction of the said housing gate was filed, and ③ the victim C did not receive the victim C.