A. Regarding the fact-finding of facts on March 29, 2019, the multi-family house in which the victim B resides (hereinafter “multi-family house in this case”) is the window of the bathing room where the victim B was shower, and there is no division or control by human or physical facilities in the process of going to the window of the bathing room where the victim B was shower, and is the boundary of the neighboring building installed at that place. Thus, even if the defendant went to the inside of the instant multi-household house after the instant multi-household house, it cannot be said that he chips into the dwelling.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts regarding the crime of entering a structure is not simply referred to as a structure itself, but it includes the above summary. It is clearly revealed that the manager of the surrounding land adjacent to the building to be its summary was provided for the use of the building by installing door and fence, etc. on the boundary with the outside (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6133, Jun. 10, 2004). In the crime of intrusion upon residence, the term "residential" does not simply refer to the house itself, but includes the above summary, such as the fixed number, and the elevator, stairs and corridor used for public use in the apartment house such as multi-household, multi-household, apartment house, apartment house, or apartment house, etc., which are essential parts for the exclusive use of each household or household used as a residence, and which are planned to be supervised and managed in daily life by the residents and in fact need to protect the peace of residential life, and therefore, it is necessary to establish a residential house, apartment house, or apartment house.