The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant opened the victim’s house gate and went before the front of the entrance, and invaded upon the victim’s house, the Defendant entered the victim’s house for the purpose of collecting civil judgment money, and there was no intention to intrude upon the residence.

In addition, this is not illegal as it does not violate social rules.

B. Of the facts charged in this case, the prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (not guilty and not guilty part of the judgment of the original trial), concerning the fact that the defendant entered the victim's house and invaded the victim's house, and that the defendant assaulted the victim, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant sufficiently recognized the fact that the victim sealed the victim's house and intrudes the victim's house into the entrance, and assaulted the victim in the process. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of unfair sentencing (one million won of fine) is too uneasible.

2. Judgment on the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly adopted and examined the judgment on the intention of intrusion upon residence: (i) the Defendant and the victim were in the divorce lawsuit at the time of the instant case; (ii) not only the Defendant and the victim were in the process of a divorce lawsuit, but also the Defendant and the victim did not have any pecuniary conflict, such as a lawsuit for indemnity brought against the victim by F, a company F, a representative director, from April 12, 2018 (Supplementary District Court Branch Branch Branch Decision 2017Gahap488) to a favorable judgment on April 12, 2018; and (iii) the Defendant found the victim’s house for the first time more than 15 months after the commencement of his stay with the victim around July 2017.