A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 20, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the crime of attempted fraud in the Changwon District Court's Msan Branch, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 28, 2012.

On September 24, 2011, the Plaintiff D’s agent, the owner of the loan of this case, sold the loan of this case to G 172 million won in the name of the Defendant’s agent G around September 24, 201, and around that time, only five million won in the down payment among the above 172 million won was paid to the victim.

At the time of the sale, the Defendant, the buyer, completed repair, and the Defendant received the key of the entrance door of the instant lending, and the Defendant, the buyer of the instant lending, was not able to possess the instant lending prior to the payment of the remainder, and was not a director of the instant lending.

Although the Defendant did not pay any balance to the victim on October 3, 201, the Defendant opened the entrance by using the key of the instant Ba, which was possessed by the Defendant, and arbitrarily moved into the instant Ba, thereby infringing on the instant Ba, which is a residence of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the respective statutory statements made by witnesses D, H, E, and G;

1. Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. The defendant's assertion as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution (the process of this case, etc.) asserts that since the defendant was not aware of the special agreement of this case and accepted the key of the loan from the victim for repair after purchasing the loan, the defendant has the right to possess as the legitimate lien holder. Thus, the crime of intrusion upon residence cannot be

The defendant, the defendant, the defendant.