A. As to the infringement of a building and attempted intrusion on a structure, the center for senior citizens of the C apartment complex in Jeju City (hereinafter “the center for senior citizens of this case”) is a place where anyone can access if the above apartment residents are the residents of the apartment, and there is no right for the head of the management office to close the center for senior citizens of this case. Thus, the act of the above resident of the apartment to enter or attempt to enter the center for senior citizens of this case does not constitute the crime of intrusion on a structure or

B. Where a defendant opens a warning letter and an unknown door to enter the center for older persons of this case, or dismantles the locks in order to cause damage to each property, it constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the rules of society.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the Defendant’s attempt to intrude a structure and intrude a structure, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the same purport as the grounds for appeal on this part of the lower judgment, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on this part of the allegation in detail.

2) According to the relevant legal principles, even if a person permitted access to a usual structure due to the relationship with a resident or manager, if the act of entering the dwelling was committed against the explicit or presumed intention of the resident or manager, the crime of intrusion on the structure is established if the act of entering the dwelling was committed despite being contrary to the explicit or presumed intention of the resident or manager. Barring any special circumstance, if the act of entering the entrance is not normal access through the entrance, the method of intrusion itself should be deemed contrary to the above intent (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2595, Aug. 23, 2007, etc.). (B) In light of the above legal principles, the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (a) C apartment management complaint was conducted by the prosecutor.