Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On September 26, 2019, from around 02:38 to 03:25 on the same day, the Defendant opened a locked steel-processed goods storage entrance with a key to open the locked steel-processed goods storage unit in front of the victim C’s house located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and attempted several times, but failed to commit it with the wind that does not meet the password.

Summary of Evidence

1. In full view of the aforementioned evidence, it is reasonable to deem that there was commencement of the crime, since the Defendant attempted to open the victim's warehouse entrance door numberer (channel 2: 02:4:06 to 02:45:05) at the time of the instant case, in full view of the following evidence, such as the investigation report of the witness C's legal statement (suspect 4- The CCTV image tracking in the course of the suspect's escape), the CCTV image printing data (other than the police opinion) and the CD [the Defendant and the defense counsel did not engage in any conduct falling under the commencement of the crime of intrusion, and there was no intention to commit the crime, and it is recognized that there was an intention to commit the crime in light of the Defendant's behavior, the background leading up to the occurrence of the case, the circumstances before and after the instant case, the means and method of committing the crime].

1. Relevant Article 322 of the Criminal Act and Articles 322 and 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;