The judgment below

Among them, the part concerning the defendant's intrusion against the defendant A and the part concerning the defendant B shall be reversed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. (1) In light of the status of Defendant A and the background leading up to the complaint, etc., with respect to Defendant A, the statement of Party E seeking to avoid is reliable and the credibility of the statement of Party E and Party C, which are closely related to Defendant A, falls short of the credibility of the statement of Party E. Thus, the facts charged without Defendant A’s accusation based on various evidence, such as the statement of Party E, have been proven to

I would like to say.

(2) In light of the fact that Defendant A sent a text message to the effect that Defendant A would enter the residence of E, Defendant A had dolusent intent to commit a crime of intrusion upon residence.

I would like to say.

B. The removal of Defendant B’s wall by G, who is his father and wife, from Defendant B, was done by implied public offering in order with Defendant B, and even if the public offering relation between Defendant B and G is severed, Defendant B’s act constitutes attempted act.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio (in part regarding Defendant A’s intrusion on residence), the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with the purport that “the part regarding Defendant A’s intrusion on residence in the first-B and the part regarding Defendant A’s “ through open gate” in the part regarding Defendant A’s intrusion on residence in the third place was changed to “the part regarding the installed fence is cut off and narrow.” Since this court permitted this, the part regarding Defendant A’s intrusion on residence in the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, since the issue of determination and contents of the facts charged is substantially identical despite the existence of such grounds for reversal ex officio, the reason for appeal by the prosecutor is still subject to deliberation and determination per party: Provided, That since the facts charged for intrusion upon the dwelling of Defendant A came to the first instance and changed as “after the change” under the following, the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to Defendant A based on the changed facts charged.