2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant entered the penta (hereinafter “instant penta”) that C resides against C’s will.

B. The following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court are apparent that the wind gate inside the instant pent structure was shipped out of the building. D is an individual product of the Defendant, and it is hard to believe that the Defendant, in light of the following facts: (a) he or she or she did not have a wind gate; (b) he or she made a statement in the investigation process of the relevant case that he or she had a wind gate; and (c) the witness E's statement in this court that he or she had a wind gate E, was made; (d) the statement in this court of the witness E, which he or she had a wind gate, was made to the investigation agency as above; (e) the statement in the relevant case was made by A as a witness (at last, he or she had a wind gate, but later came to the exhibition hall, and (e) it was difficult to believe that the Defendant had a part of the CCTV to move to her wind gate, etc., and (e) it was difficult for the Defendant to move out the building.

C. However, according to the above evidence, the instant pention consists of five units of pention building (Fhos or Ghos) and five exhibition rooms, and E is a land and facility of H innam-gun, i.e., the instant pention for two years from C around April 2016.