All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant (1) and Defendant 1 misunderstanding of the fact that the F gave rise to several occasions to the outer walls or the front door door of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu apartment 103 Dong 905 (hereinafter “905”) (hereinafter “905”) in which the F reside, but did not account for 111 times, such as the list of crimes, and it was difficult to view that the F and G merely acted to cause harm and harm to F and G, and that it was a notice of specific harm and injury, the lower court convicted Defendant 1 of the charges on the part of habitual intimidation. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

나. 검사 (1) 법리 오해 피고인은 피해자들을 협박하기 위해 905호로 찾아 가 아파트 공용부분인 외벽 또는 현관문을 수차례 발로 찼는바, 이는 피해자들의 주거의 평온을 해한 것이어서 주거 침입죄를 구성함에도, 원심은 주거 침입의 공소사실에 대하여 무죄를 선고 하였으니, 원심판결에는 법리를 오인하여 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있다.

(2) The above sentence, which the court below committed against the defendant, is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted by the court below as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the victim F’s statement is highly reliable. Since the Defendant could fully recognize the fact that he habitually threatened the victim F and G over 111 times in total as stated in this part of the facts charged, the court below’s judgment convicting the Defendant of the above facts charged is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the Defendant.

(1) From May 2014 to July 2015, 905.