The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is to find the defendant's residence with a view to talking about his or her spouse who is living separately. Thus, the defendant's act does not constitute an intrusion upon his or her residence, but the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding the facts and finding the defendant guilty of an intrusion upon the residence.

2. In the judgment, when entering the residence of another person against the resident’s will, the crime of intrusion upon residence is established. Here, the resident’s intention can be presumed to include not only explicit but also implied cases, and the resident’s dissenting opinion may be inferred depending on the surrounding circumstances.

The crime of intrusion upon residence is established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do1256, May 30, 2003). Since the crime of intrusion upon residence is the protected legal interest of the peace of actual residence. Thus, even if a person is permitted to enter the residence in peace due to the relationship with the resident, etc., if the act of entering the residence is committed despite being contrary to the resident’s explicit or presumed intent, the crime of intrusion upon residence is established if the act of entering the residence was committed despite being contrary to the resident’s explicit or presumed intent. In other cases

(1) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant’s dwelling intrusion was committed against the victim’s intent, and thus, it is justifiable to have determined by the lower court that recognized the Defendant’s residence intrusion. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

① At the time of the instant case, the Defendant and the victim were legally married, but a conflict was under way, and the victim was living together with his/her husband and wife and was living separately from the Defendant.

(2) The defendant shall live in his/her dwelling by telephone, telephone, race, etc.