The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

1. On February 25, 2014, the Defendant found the Defendant at the home that he did not contact with the victim who embezzled company’s public funds in front of the victim C, 202 Dong 804, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 2014, and 804, thereby harming peace in residence by avoiding disturbance between about 20 minutes, such as a hand and abundance of the entrance.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record of judgment, it is difficult to view that the facts charged in the instant case, which the Defendant violated D’s residence alone, was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

The crime of intrusion upon residence in Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act provides that an act of intrusion upon a human's residence is a constituent element, and the act of intrusion means physical infringement and the body of an offender enters the residence.

However, according to the evidence submitted, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant moved into D's residence only in order to take the first race in D's apartment corridor and to verify whether he/she is in his/her house.

B. The prosecutor asserts that the defendant's act of entering the above apartment floor into the joint entrance of the first floor and leading D's house was an act of intrusion upon the residence. The defendant's act of entering the joint entrance is recognized as an act of intrusion upon the residence, as alleged by the house prosecutor.

Even if the Defendant, as a D’s workplace employee, embezzled the company’s funds and visited the above apartment in order to keep the female from contact with D without permission for several days, the Defendant visited the above apartment. Since the Defendant took a personal phone before the first floor of the co-ownership center and talked with the co-owner, and the entrance door entered the door into the open co-site, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had the intention of entering the residence.

C. Before and after the date and time stated in the facts charged, the content of text messages sent and received by the Defendant and D is examined.