Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding three hundred thousand won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a religious organization “B”.

On October 23, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 09:00 to 10:00, and around the house of the victim D (n, 92 years of age) located in Jeju-si, the Defendant opened the entrance door through the house, and intruded on the victim’s residence without the victim’s permission.

Summary of Evidence

1. A statement made by the witness E in this Court;

1. Statement of the suspect interrogation protocol on the accused prepared by the police;

1. Entry and video (including attached documents) of the inspection protocol of this Court;

1. Investigative report (including the case of field confirmation) and video (including attached documents) of police preparation;

1. Determination of the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion in a copy of the emergency medical service log

1. The main point of the victim's argument is that the outside gate is always opened at the independent house located in the framework of the city. The defendant's act of entering the city for the purpose of the breath and the defendant's act of entering the house for the purpose of rescue in consideration of the large voice of money (victim) within the house when the defendant entered the city for the purpose of rescue constitutes an act that does not violate social rules. Thus, the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act as provided in Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

2. Determination:

A. Since the crime of intrusion upon a residence is the law protected by the law of peace of a real residence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 83Do1429, Apr. 24, 1984; 87Do3, May 12, 1987; 87Do1760, Nov. 10, 1987). The criminal intent of intrusion upon a residence does not necessarily require the awareness that the whole body enters another person’s residence, but it is sufficient if a part of the body enters another person’s residence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do2561, Sept. 15, 1995). When entering another person’s residence contrary to the intention of a resident, the crime of intrusion upon a residence is established, and at this time, the resident’s intention is expressed.