The defendant was found to have not installed a crime prevention window at the window of the victim's residence while leaving the place of residence via usual victim B(n, 30 years of age). During one night, the defendant was able to enter the victim's residence by using the gap in which the victim is self-employed during one night.

피고인은 2019. 10. 2. 01:59경 인천 중구 C주택 D호에 있는 위 피해자의 주거지 앞에 이르러, 시정되어 있지 않은 위 주거지 주방 쪽 창문(가로 약 65cm, 세로 약 26cm)을 모두 떼어내고 들어간 후 자신의 휴대전화 불빛을 이용하여 주변을 살피면서 부엌과 방 사이에 있는 미닫이문을 열고 방 안으로 들어가려고 하였으나 이를 알아챈 피해자가 재빨리 미닫이문을 닫고 잠근 뒤 ‘누구야’라고 소리치자 창문을 통해 도주하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs and CCTV photographs;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the relevant criminal facts and Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act, after being aware of the fact that the victim’s dwelling space was not installed in the victim’s dwelling space, the Defendant invaded upon the victim’s dwelling by removing the windows of the victim’s dwelling, as stated in its reasoning.

Around September 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of indictment due to an indecent act by force, and around September 2017, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the suspension of execution despite the record of being sentenced to the suspension of imprisonment due to a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act at the Public Place). However, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the suspension of execution. The Defendant, who invaded another person’s residence during the new wall time period during which it is impossible to expect another person’s help, she frightd the victim, and she

The victim is uneasiness and depression caused by the crime of this case.