The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the following facts.

1) The Defendant obtained a comprehensive and implied consent from the victim who was in a relationship with the victim to enter the victim’s house, and thus, cannot be deemed as infringing upon the victim’s house against the victim’s will.

2) The Defendant did not assault the victim.

B. The punishment of a fine of one million won sentenced by the lower court which was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the part of intrusion on residence, the defendant was in a relationship with the victim from March 2014, and the defendant knew that he/she was in custody of the victim's house key, and the victim did not actively recover the key because he/she was in a relationship with the defendant, and the fact that the victim was found in the defendant's house on the following day of the crime of this case is recognized.

However, solely on the above circumstances, the victim comprehensively consented to the entry of the victim into the victim's house.

In addition, the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the Defendant’s entry of the victim’s house on the day of the instant crime, taking into account the victim’s house without the victim’s explicit consent, i.e., the actual ditch between the Defendant and the victim immediately after the victim enters the victim’s house without the victim’s consent, the degree of violence as seen below, and the situation between the Defendant and the victim immediately before the instant crime committed by the victim.

It is also difficult to see it.

In light of the above circumstances, the victim should not enter the victim's house without explicit permission.