A. Since the defendant had access to a structure with the permission of the I, i.e., the child of the building owner at the time of entering the structure, the judgment of the court below which convicted him of this part of the charges is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s judgment regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of the circumstances set forth in its reasoning, and convicted the Defendant as to the entry of the structure in this part.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

B. Compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized his/her mistake as to the special assault, against which he/she reflects his/her mistake; and (b) the fact that the Defendant appears to have not much emphasis on the damage caused by the building intrusion.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant without permission by the victim B, and assaulted the victim E and F with a string signboard, which is a dangerous object, in light of the risk, and the crime was hot, did not completely recover from damage, and did not receive any remedy from the victims.

In addition, in full view of the various sentencing conditions shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, etc., the original summary order shall be fined.