All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles)’s injury, as indicated in this part of the facts charged, did not inflict an injury on the victim by pricesing the snow of the victim as stated in the facts charged.

The first instance court found the victim's statement without credibility to be guilty of this part of the facts charged as evidence, and there is an error of law in violation of the rules of evidence.

2) The Defendant did not have assaulted the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged.

The first instance court found the victim and F's statements without credibility as evidence to be guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of law in violation of the rules of evidence.

3) The Defendant, after visiting a house after a house, visited the victim’s house in the same apartment, was found in the house of the victim in the same apartment. The act of entering the elevator, corridor, etc. of an apartment under the direction of another co-resident does not constitute an act of intrusion upon a house in the crime of intrusion upon a house.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes intrusion upon residence, the defendant's act is merely a string of the victim's house door in order to return the victim's cell phone, and thus, the defendant's act is not contrary to social norms, and its illegality is excluded.

B. A prosecutor 1) The Defendant, who misleads the victim about the non-guilty part (the non-guilty part) with the knowledge that the victim was fluoring another woman, visited the victim's house to resist it, and did not leave the victim's house continuously despite the victim's repeated demand for eviction. Thus, the Defendant's act cannot be viewed as being contrary to the social rules and thus, the illegality cannot be denied.

2) Improper one deliberation of sentencing (one million won of suspended sentence (one million won of suspended sentence)) is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine is injury.