주거침입
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal of this case is that the defendant is not allowed to enter as long as the victim, who is the owner, clearly expressed his intention to prohibit entry and exit by installing a joint plate, so long as the victim clearly expressed his intention to prohibit entry and exit.
In addition, since the defendant's act of entering the back of the instant pen does not meet the reasonableness of means and methods and balance of legal interests, illegality cannot be deemed as a justifiable act.
2. The following circumstances revealed by the records of the board: (i) the instant septic tank is a joint septic tank connected to the defendant's office and the victim's pension; and (ii) the victim's operation of the septic tank lids are malodored so that the defendant's business could not be operated at the defendant's office if he did not open the septic tank lids, and the victim was placed in a wooden mold so that he could not block all of the defendant's slabs; (ii) the defendant was able to choose other methods than lids from the victim's back of the fence in order to eliminate malodor that is fluent in the frequency; and (iii) it appears that the defendant who operates the frequency of the purification tank lids enter the restaurant, appears to have no way to choose other than lids from the victim's back of the pen, and it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act in this case is unlawful as a legitimate act that does not violate the social rules.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is justified.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.