Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 3,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On June 27, 2018, Defendant A was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the District Court of Jung-gu, which became final and conclusive on July 5, 2018, and Defendant B was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the District Court of Jung-gu on June 27, 2018, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 5, 2018.

[2017 High 1016 : Defendant A] On January 10, 2017, at around 10:00, the Defendant entered the above place and occupied the building managed by others by using the password of electronic fishing 303 owned by the victim E in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, without the consent of the victim.

[2] On January 13, 2017, at around 10:00, the Defendants conspired with the Defendant to remove the entrance door set forth in the above 502, and to enter the entrance door set forth in the above 502, at around 502 entrance, the Defendant B allowed the Defendant A to leave the entrance door set forth in the above 502, and the Defendant A allowed the repair shop with the key whose name is unknown to remove one of the above electronic locks set out in the market price set forth in the victim E owned by the Defendant and throw it away, and continued to move into the said 502 G.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to damage the property owned by the victim, thereby impairing its utility, and invaded upon the structure managed by others.

Summary of Evidence

[2017 High Court Decision 1016]

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Each legal statement of witness E and H;

1. The defendant asserts that a certified copy of the registry and a joint business contract [the defendant 303 lending of this case does not constitute a crime of intrusion on a structure since it is a place where free access is allowed as a sales office.

However, according to each of the above evidence, the above 303 was passed since it was not used as a sales office, and the password of the electronic scam was also managed by the damaged person, and at the request of the defendant for the repair of defects, the entry was allowed.