All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the CCTV screen photographs produced by the lower court as evidence of guilt are illegally collected and provided in violation of the Personal Information Protection Act, and thus, inadmissible evidence is inadmissible. Moreover, the Defendant did not voluntarily enter the building site in Jeju Navy, nor conspired with C, etc., nor did the Defendant intent to intrude into a structure. The front of the building site in this case cannot be deemed as the “main point of the building” of the building, and the Defendant’s act constitutes justifiable act with the intent to resist the obstruction of installation of a temporary stage. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by mistake of facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles. 2) Even if the Defendant was found guilty of the Defendant, the lower court’s sentencing (one year of suspension of execution in

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unfortunate and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to illegally collected evidence, the submission of evidence illegally collected or provided by a private person shall be determined by weighing and balancing the public interest, such as effective criminal prosecution and discovery of truth in criminal proceedings, and the protection interest of an individual’s personal interests, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3990, Sept. 9, 2010). The CCTV screen images of this case were provided in violation of the provisions on the collection and provision of personal information under the Personal Information Protection Act.

Even if the above photographs are necessary for the realization of the public interest of discovery of truth in criminal proceedings, there is a high need to allow submission of evidence. This is difficult to view that the defendant's act was taken in a public place by himself/herself, and thereby seriously or essentially infringed on the defendant's privacy and freedom.

The above photographs are inadmissible by the defendant or the defendant.