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

1. 건조물 침입 피고인은 2015. 11. 20. 01:30 경 동해시 C에 있는 피해자 D가 관리하는 ‘E’ 사무실 앞을 술에 취해 지나가던 중 그 곳 선배들과 말 다툼하여 기분이 나빴던 것이 생각났다.

Accordingly, the defendant knew that the entrance of the office was not corrected, and entered the office room without correction, and intruded into the building.

2. The Defendant damaged the wall surface of the “E” office at the same time and at the same place as the preceding paragraph, and then damaged the wall that was 101,000 won at the market price by several times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness D;

1. A report on investigation (calculated amount of damage);

1. Photographs (the Defendant is a person who is allowed to freely enter the “E” office as stated in the facts constituting the crime, and thus does not constitute a crime of intrusion on a structure.

And the witness D also opened the above office to the people including the defendant in the court.

was stated.

However, since the crime of intrusion upon a structure is a de facto legal interest in protecting the peace of the dwelling, even if a person who is permitted to enter the structure due to the relation with the manager is found to be a crime if the act of entering a specific structure was committed against the presumed will of the manager.

According to the evidence of the court below, the defendant entered the above office under the influence of alcohol and damaged the wall of the defendant, and the defendant did not first notify the victim, etc. of his mistake until investigative agency confirmed the identity of the defendant through the request for communication confirmation data, etc. after the lapse of two weeks after the damage case. Considering these circumstances, the defendant's act of entering the above building can be recognized as sufficiently against the implied will of the manager at least the manager's implied act.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;