The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On January 22, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 14:10, the Defendant reported to the police as a matter of noise noise; (b) the police officer, who was in the victim’s house by taking the front seal of the victim’s house and opening his door door, invaded the victim’s house by entering the door door to the front door.

2. According to each evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant, in order to comply with the issue of inter-floor noise, is acknowledged that the victim reported to the police as an issue of inter-floor noise, the defendant takes the first race in the house of the victim on the following floor and takes a door back to the apartment gate of the heater victim, and the defendant thereafter follows the report to the police at the entrance, and the defendant made a protest against the notification from the entrance to the police, and went out of the entrance.

However, the following circumstances that are inferred from the same evidence in the above facts of recognition, i.e., the police officer D who was called upon by the victim after receiving the victim's report at the victim's house, and the victim's house, listen to the details of the report from the victim at the victim's house, and the victim was known through the present CCTV at the time when the defendant takes a front letter of the victim's house and opened a door to the victim, and the police officer D and E knew that the visiting person was the defendant, after receiving the victim's report, called the defendant, and the defendant was sent to the police officer D and E and E, and thus, it seems that the person who takes the front letter was the defendant. In such circumstance, the police officer opened the front door of the victim's house and the defendant was now present without being prevented from the above E and D, and the fact that the victim was reported to the police officer in the middle of the noise complaint.