logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.06.14 2016고정3073
주거침입
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 25, 2016, the Defendant: (a) on April 25, 2016, the victim D, who was a resident for the purpose of selling and buying the above apartment, was found to have invaded upon the victim’s residence by spreading the entrance door password against the victim’s will, with the intention of selling and buying the apartment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and E;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a detailed statement of transfer household inspection;

1. Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 319 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant freely entered the apartment of this case as the owner of the apartment of this case, and that the crime of intrusion into the apartment of this case is not established since he entered the apartment of this case with the consent of F, one of the joint housing owners at the time.

However, since the crime of intrusion upon a house is a de facto legal interest to protect the peace of a house, the crime of intrusion upon a house is established if the act of entering a house goes against the explicit or presumed intention of the resident or manager. If there are more than one person, one person's consent if it is directly or indirectly against the other person's will, and if it is contrary to the intention of the other person, access to the house constitutes a crime of intrusion upon a house, since it is a result of undermining the peace of the residence, i.e., the control and management of the house (see Supreme Court Decision 83Do685, Jun. 26, 1984, etc.). According to each evidence of the holding, the defendant entered the apartment of this case into the victim D who is residing in the apartment of this case in relation to the ownership and sale of the apartment of this case, and the defendant entered the entrance password to sell the apartment of this case, and then entered the apartment of this case.

arrow