A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant sent the victim’s message to the effect of intimidation, such as “the victim B (here, 22 years of age) using another person’s telephone device or making contact with the victim,” on the ground that the former female-friendly job offering victim B (here, 22 years of age) blocking the Defendant’s telephone number and not communicating the Defendant.”

1. On July 6, 2018, around 06:10 on July 6, 2018, the Defendant, who committed the crime, entered the password, which was known to the victim, on the first floor of the apartment building of the victim's house located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with the victim, during the period of return from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence against the victim's will.

2. The Defendant, on July 19, 2018, entered the victim’s house apartment building from the first floor to the victim’s house apartment building in the same manner as the one described in paragraph (1) on July 19, 2018, and invaded the victim’s residence against the victim’s will.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning B;

1. Application of the investigative report (CCTV fags) and CCTV-faging photograph Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered as follows)

1. The punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the circumstance unfavorable to the defendant, the fact that the defendant's first offender, the fact that the defendant seems to have committed the crime, and the fact that the circumstances after the application for detention warrant was dismissed are extremely poor, such as the fact that the defendant continued to contact the victim, etc. after the application for detention warrant was rejected, or that the defendant appears to have recognized and reflected the crime, and other various sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct