When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

From early 2008 to November 2008, the Defendant was a person who worked as a custodian in a fish farm located in Daegu-gun D located in the Daegu-gun, which was operated by the victim C, and the victim C entered into a loan agreement with the Korea Asset Management Corporation, and operated a fish farm in the land located in Daegu-gun, Daegu-gun, a State-owned land.

At around 12:00 on October 10, 2015, the Defendant intruded into a structure managed by the victim, such as cleaning after entering a container office installed by the victim located in the fish farm located in the Daegu-gun D, which is located in the fish farm.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police statement of C;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (as to the possession, ownership, and possession of fish farms as the place of origin);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

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 (Article 334(1) of the Act recognizes that the Defendant entered a fish farm container with the victim’s possessory right without the victim’s consent, and such act constitutes a constituent element of the crime of intrusion into a structure under the Criminal Act. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant had a claim, such as wages, etc. against the victim, and intended to use the fish farm for payment with compensation, etc. while occupying and managing the fish farm does not constitute a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.