A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On December 9, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of intrusion upon residence at the Seoul Southern District Court on December 9, 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 11, 2015 (the first crime), and on September 8, 2015, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced a one-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for a four-month suspended sentence, and the appeal is dismissed on December 3, 2015, and is currently pending in the final appeal.

[The facts of the crime] around 19:45 on December 4, 2015, the Defendant entered the front door, which was corrected by other residents entering the apartment, into the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Guro-gu apartment complex 206-dong, and followed the victim’s residence by opening up to 5th floor from the victim’s home corridor (71 tax) with an elevator getting up to 501, making the front door level 10 times, opening and closing the lock door door, and opening the lock door door, making the victim’s house lick up to 10 times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A certified copy of register;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, reporting on the result of confirmation of the previous conviction before and after the disposition, and reporting on investigation (Attachment to the judgment, etc.);

1. Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the reason for sentencing provided for in Article 39 (1) of the same Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to three years; and

2. Determination of sentence: (a) the first second second offense and the second concurrent offense under Article 37 of the Criminal Act (unfavorable circumstances) of the Criminal Records as stated in the judgment on which a sentence has become final and conclusive; (b) the Defendant still stated in the last statement of this case that the result of the instant judgment would be found in the victim’s house when the result of the instant judgment would be unfavorable to the Defendant; and (c) the victim did not arbitrarily inform the victim of the instant apartment even though he/she had properly owned the instant apartment at a successful bid on July 7, 2014, even if he/she had properly owned the apartment of this case.