The purpose of crime is to enter a house which has entered and has been entered without compensation and the nature of the crime of intrusion upon residence.

Even if the defendant was in a relationship with the victim's death and had access to the house free of charge, if he entered the house without the consent of the victim for the purpose of the crime, the crime of intrusion upon residence is established.

Article 319 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Doh-young

Gwangju District Court Decision 83No244 delivered on April 7, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The twenty-five days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

The defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal are examined.

Even if the defendant had access to a usual residence because he was the victim's death near the victim, the crime of intrusion upon residence is established if he entered the victim's residence without the consent of the victim for the purpose of the crime. According to the reasoning of the judgment below and the records, it is sufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant entered the house of the victim who was not a victim for the purpose of larceny. Thus, the court below's decision that decided this as a crime of intrusion upon residence is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence. The grounds for unreasonable sentencing or the reasons attributable to this cannot be considered as a legitimate ground for appeal in this case. Thus, all arguments are

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. In accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act and Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the twenty-five days of detention after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice)