A. In order to verify whether the letter that had been put in the victim's house before locking, was properly delivered, the Defendant committed a crime of intrusion on residence only, and did not commit a crime of intrusion on residence.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misunderstanding the facts, thereby pronounced guilty against the Defendant.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted after examining the evidence duly admitted as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the victim attempted to avoid persons involved in the past criminal cases of the accused or the accused prior to the instant case is recognized.

After that, although the victim's attitude seems to be somewhat changed, the defendant's act cannot be viewed as legitimate in view of the circumstances where the victim had avoided the defendant who was found in front of his house even before the victim, or the circumstances where the defendant refused to talk about him by taking the hand immediately after the case, and the position of the investigative agency on two occasions thereafter, etc.

In light of the circumstances stated by the lower court and the records of this case, the lower court rejected the same assertion as the Defendant alleged in the grounds of appeal, and erred in the lower court’s decision that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

B. There is no significant change in circumstances to consider the sentencing of the defendant after the judgment of the court below regarding the unfair argument of sentencing.

In light of the facts alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair, even if all of the circumstances alleged by the Defendant are considered as grounds of appeal.

We do not accept the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so ordered as per Disposition.