건조물침입
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, despite the fact that the defendant infringed on the female toilet of this case managed by the chief of the pansium, was erroneous.
2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the prosecutor’s above assertion is with merit.
At the time, the witness C of the lower court identified the suspect's appearance at the time of the instant female toilet room, and discovered that there is male (suspect) in the side balle column, immediately out of the toilet, and immediately out of the toilet, and the witness D of the lower court, her husband, and at the entrance of female toilet, reported to the investigation agency that the suspect was living in the vicinity of the entrance of the female toilet, and that the suspect was living in the vicinity of the suspect, and reported the suspect's appearance to the investigation agency at the time. In light of the fact that C and D paid considerable attention at the above entrance, and confirmed the suspect while waiting, it appears that the suspect's statement that C et al. intruded into female toilet, etc. was considerably reliable.
B. Meanwhile, in the criminal identification process, where a person who was a suspect alone is replaced with a witness, the witness’s statement may be deemed to have low credibility. However, other circumstances exist to suspect the suspect as a criminal in addition to the victim’s statement.
Where there are circumstances, etc. in which a witness’s specific statement or description was made with respect to the appearance, etc. of the offender, it shall not be rejected solely on the ground that the witness’s credibility is lower.