The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as the Defendant occupied the instant maintenance plant by exercising a legitimate right of retention, and thus, the Defendant’s entry into the maintenance plant of this case does not constitute the elements for the crime of intrusion on a structure, and even if the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business, such as displaying “in the course of exercising a right of retention” as a paint at a new construction site where the maintenance plant of this case is located, it constitutes a justifiable

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the defendant's grounds for appeal prior to the judgment ex officio.

According to Articles 455(3) and 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, if a defendant does not appear in the court on the date of public trial in a summary order, the court shall not open the court without the attendance of the defendant. However, according to Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, when the defendant does not appear in the court on the date of public trial, the court shall fix the date again and if the defendant does not appear in the court on the date again

(Supreme Court Decision 201Do11210 Decided December 8, 201). However, according to Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, where a defendant fails to appear in court on the court date without justifiable grounds even though he/she was unable to appear in court on the court date, a judgment may be rendered without the defendant’s statement. Thus, in order to render a judgment without any justifiable reason without the defendant’s statement when he/she was absent, the case falls under the case where the defendant did not appear in court on two consecutive consecutive occasions upon receiving the notice of due date of trial

Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9291 Decided February 23, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 201Do16166 Decided June 28, 2012, etc.