The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The building in this case, the gist of the grounds for appeal, is owned by complainants, and the act of entering a place without permission by the defendant, constitutes a crime of intrusion upon residence;

2. The lower court determined that the instant building was acquitted on the grounds that there was sufficient doubt to deem that the complainant registered the title trust of the instant building in detail, and that the complainant was the owner of the instant building, and that the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the complainant to cancel the ownership transfer registration on the grounds that the complainant was the owner of the instant building by Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2011Gahap2542, and lost the first instance court. However, the Defendant filed an appeal with Seoul High Court Decision 2011Na56745, which recognized that “the Defendant was the title trust of the instant building to the complainant,” and received a favorable judgment on the grounds that “the Defendant was the title trust of the instant building to the complainant,” and that the complainant appealeded by Supreme Court Decision 2012Da109385, but the final appeal was dismissed on June 4, 2013, the lower court’s judgment is just and acceptable.

3. Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.