beta
Main Issues
If a right holder intrudes upon a structure as a means of self-help as a result of the exercise of his/her right, the nature of the crime of intrusion upon residence (affirmative)
Summary of Judgment
Since the crime of intrusion upon residence is de facto protected as a legal interest to protect the peace of residence, the issue of whether the resident or the nursing has the right to live or to be guarded in the building, etc. does not depend on the establishment of the crime, and even if the possession of an unrelated person is the possession, peace of the residence should be protected. Thus, even if the right holder intrudes into the building as a means of self-help as an exercise of the right, the crime of intrusion upon
[Reference Provisions]
Article 319 of the Criminal Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 83Do1429 Delivered on April 24, 1984
Escopics
Defendant
upper and high-ranking persons
Defendant
Judgment of the lower court
Daejeon District Court Decision 84No523 delivered on December 15, 1984
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Since the crime of intrusion upon residence is de facto protected as a legal interest to protect the peace of residence, the issue of whether a resident or a guard has the right to reside in the building, etc. does not depend on the establishment of the crime, and even if the possession by a person without the right to possess it is the possession, the peace of residence should be protected. Thus, even if the right holder intrudes on the building as a means of self-help as an enforcement of the right, the crime of intrusion upon residence should be established. The court below's decision of approval of auction on the building of this case for which the right to collateral security has not been established upon a voluntary request for auction of the real estate owned by the defendant of the non-indicted stuff, even if the decision of approval of auction on the building of this case for which the right to collateral security has not been established is null and void, as long as the possession of the building of this case has been transferred to the above stuff, the court below's decision that found the defendant guilty is just and there is no error of law
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)