However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

C On November 5, 2010, the C was awarded a successful bid by compulsory auction of cement brick brick slves roof slves, and the said house was delivered to C by the Daegu District Court resident support enforcement officer on June 16, 201, and the Defendant is the person who resided in the said house.

At the time of delivery, the Defendant voluntarily delivered the object at the time of delivery, and entered in the execution protocol that C wishes not to raise any objection even if he arbitrarily disposed of it, but thereafter, C rejected C’s demand to move the object more than several times with locking the door in which C had the appliances, equipment, materials, etc. stored in the warehouse on the first floor, and opened cleaning work by employing 12 cleaners from September 30, 2016. On October 2, 2016, C infringed upon the house above and locked inside the door of the site and infringed C et al. to prevent access to the site by taking corrective measures against C et al.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A certified copy of the register, or a report on the delivery and execution of real estate;

1. Each investigation report (Nos. 7, 9, and 13 in the list of evidence);

1. Certification of contents, application of Acts and subordinate statutes on-site inspection photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 140-2 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. The Defendant, for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter the following sentencing grounds), has impaired the utility of real estate subject to compulsory execution as stated in the facts constituting the crime.

When considering the fact that a person committed such a crime after the lapse of several years from the time of compulsory execution, the nature of the crime is not weak.

The defendant's above act entered the above real estate and planned to live.