If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Some of the facts charged were corrected.

The defendant had a good appraisal with the victim D (59) who is the husband of the above house lessor due to the lease of the house located in Busan Seo-gu C.

On August 8, 2015, at around 22:50, the Defendant came to the house of the victim D located in Busan Yagu, Busan Yagu, and went to the house of the victim D in order to comply with the work, in which the victim and telephone conversationsd with D, he voluntarily opened the house of the victim D and intruded into the house of the victim D.

Defendant continued to enter South Korea’s house from Victim D;

B. The term “A”, while taking into account why the horses would have been dynasceded, frighting the victim’s d’s fat, and fating the victim’s e (n, 24 years of age) and the victim’s wife F (n, 54 years of age) on the ground that the victim’s d’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim D's residence, and assaulted the victim D, E, and F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D, E, F, and G;

1. The legal statement of the witness H in part;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts, on-site photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intrusion upon residence), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of assault) and the selection of each fine for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Reasons for conviction under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment;

1. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) the Defendant entered the entrance of the building in which the victim D operates a restaurant and entered the corridor; (b) however, the victim did not open the door of the living room or enter the said door; and (c) thus, the Defendant invaded upon the residence of the said victim.

Now may be seen, and ② there is no assault against victims as stated in its reasoning.