Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Around April 5, 2018, the Defendant infringed on a structure: (a) around 01:35, on the ground that he/she did not enter into a lease agreement with the joint owner in the “D” store located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) thereby, he/she intruded with the locks locking out of the said store operated by the victim E by the victim E. On the ground that he/she did not enter the said store. (c) On April 6, 2018, the Defendant damaged the property by: (a) around 13:00 on April 6, 2018, in a manner that the damaged person entered the victim’s store, and carried out the victim’s house out of the victim’s house in the store; and (d) on the ground that he/she did not enter the said store.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report occurrence of accidents (damage to property and intrusion into residence);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of a structure intrusion, the selection of a fine), and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the occupation of a property damage and the selection of a fine);

2. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which increases concurrent crimes;

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

4. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the grounds for conviction) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Although the summary of the argument and the first floor of the building as indicated in the judgment with F, the Defendant, and F, as the form of the instant store (hereinafter “instant store”) have shared 1/2 shares, F, without the Defendant’s consent, leased the instant store to the victim without the Defendant’s consent, and thus, the Defendant, as a means of self-help under the Civil Act, leads to the following actions in order to recover the possession of the instant store from possession.

2. Article 209 of the Civil Act provides that “A possessor may defend himself/herself with his/her own force against an act of improper deprivation or obstruction of his/her possession.”

Paragraph 2 provides that "if the possessor of an immovable property has been deprived of possession, the possessor of the immovable property may withdraw from the perpetrator immediately after the deprivation.