Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 3, 2017, the Defendant invadedd the victim’s residence by entering the said Madern, beyond the fence installed in the victim’s house in order to verify whether the Madle, which was the victim’s house C, was his/her house, around 11:19 on March 3, 201.

2. The Defendant damaged property at the time and place indicated in the above 1.1. at the time and place, and as the victim C gets out of the fence, the Defendant was able to find out the Defendant out of the fence, and then damaged one of the decline pipes equivalent to KRW 7,000 in the market price owned by the victim and installed on the fence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C Complaints;

1. Each statement protocol with respect to C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing Ctv video explanatory materials;

1. Article 319 (1) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, as well as the selection of a fine, respectively;

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

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the main text of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which bears the costs of lawsuit

1. Since the Defendant’s assertion is one’s own land outside the fence, it does not constitute a crime of intrusion upon residence, and the decline pipe is consistent with one’s own land, and thus, it does not constitute a crime of damaging property as it is not owned by the victim.

2. According to the records, the Defendant: (a) the fact that the victim was in front of the entrance of the place where the victim was living outside the fence; (b) the fact that the victim resisted the Defendant; and (c) the fact that the Defendant returned to his house and sought a decline pipe installed by the victim; and (d) the decline pipe, which can be easily separated from the land, was consistent with the land.

In full view of the fact that the defendant cannot be seen, the defendant invadeds the victim's residence beyond the above fence, thereby impairing the peace of the victim's residence.