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

The defendant is a person who has repeatedly filed a request for information disclosure and civil petition against B and public officials belonging thereto.

On or before March 13, 2019, the Defendant entered the B office building located in C as of March 13, 2019, and remains in the above office building until after 18:00 as of the same day, the Defendant was forced to leave the office building after receiving a request for eviction from a public official in charge of the protection of the office building.

At around 23:45 on the same day, the Defendant, despite indicating that the public official in charge of the protection of the office building was not allowed to enter the office building while trying to enter the office building in front of the latter part of the B office building, had the public official in name B opened a entrance by using a card key and entered the office building, and went through the entrance door opened according to the above public official.

Accordingly, the Defendant intruded on the B government office buildings managed by D, public officials in charge of the above office building protection.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of F, G, and H;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each statement of I, J and K;

1. A written accusation, a form of filing a complaint by the defendant, a civil petition filed by the defendant client, an application for disclosure of information by the defendant client, a civil petition processing book by oral and telephone (2019), the details of access to the recent office building by the defendant client,

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (the phone call of the party executive staff), a report on investigation (the phone statement of the party executive staff E) and a report on investigation (CCTV fixs and photographs);

1. Relevant Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant asserts that the summary of the argument does not constitute intrusion on the building since he entered the building B after obtaining permission to enter night from the duty officer on the day of the instant case.

2. The determination is generally open.