All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

All the costs of the lawsuit by the original instance and the party shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In around 2009, the Defendants: (a) were the buyers who sold the relevant apartment unit to the E apartment and paid the down payment and intermediate payment; (b) entered the password of the current door locking device that was known through the apartment management office at the time, and properly occupied it.

Therefore, the defendants' occupancy of this case is a case of entering the apartment normally with the permission of the entrusted management company, which is the victim, and thus does not constitute unauthorized intrusion.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts is as follows: ① although the defendants paid the down payment and the intermediate payment as the buyers of the above apartment, the defendants did not pay the balance at the time of the occupancy of the above apartment, and the dispute (such as the termination of the contract and the reduction of the sale price) occurred with the selling company and continued civil litigation; ② the defendants confirmed the apartment household in the management office or the apartment unit in question and confirmed the password, and if there are circumstances, it is difficult to deem that they obtained the victim's consent, and ③ the defendants were unable to properly move into the apartment of this case due to their own failure to pay the balance at the time of the occurrence of the civil dispute, and it appears that the defendants commenced possession of the apartment of this case for the purpose of occupying the favorable status in the lawsuit, and it cannot be deemed that they occupied the apartment of this case with the mistake that they obtained the victim's consent. In light of the above, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendants violated the building without permission as stated in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, each of the above arguments by the Defendants is without merit.

B. Defendant B on the assertion of unfair sentencing.