The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendant’s act of the gist of the grounds for appeal is to restore the legitimate lien, and there was no exercise of physical evidence in the course of entering the victim’s residence, and thus, even if the crime of intrusion was not established, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Since the crime of intrusion upon residence is de facto protected as a legal interest, the establishment of crime does not depend on whether a resident or a guard has a legal authority to reside in or accept a structure, etc., and even if an illegal occupation is held under private law, if the right holder intrudes upon the residence or structure without following due process to exclude it, the crime of intrusion upon residence is established.

B. On the ground of the instant case, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s intrusion upon the victim’s residence is acknowledged as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment. Even if the Defendant’s assertion is based on circumstances, the crime of intrusion upon the victim’s residence is established in realizing the right without following the procedure prescribed by law. Thus, the Defendant

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.