1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part concerning Defendant A, and the part concerning Defendant A, C, C, K, CL, CM, CN, and CO in the judgment of the second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) The punishment of the lower court against Defendant A (crimes 1 through 6-a. Crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and 6-b. Crimes: Imprisonment for three months) on the first instance court’s 1) is too unfasible and unfair.

2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A No. 1 is too unreasonable.

B. As to the second instance judgment, Defendant CK did not submit the reason for appeal within 20 days after receiving a notice of receipt of the record of trial from this court after filing an appeal against the second instance judgment. However, as examined below, Defendant CK did not dismiss Defendant CK’s appeal on the ground that there is a ground for reversal ex officio.

1) The Prosecutor’s 2nd sentence against Defendant C, CK, CL, CM, CN, CN, CO, and CP (Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, two years of suspended execution, fine of 500,000 won, confiscation, Defendant CK: imprisonment for eight months, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service order, 120 hours of confiscation, Defendant CL, CM, CN, CN, andCO: imprisonment with prison labor for six months, two years of suspended execution, two hours of community service order, two years of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution, two years of fine of 300,000 won, and 120 hours of community service order) is unreasonable.

2) Defendant AA’s misunderstanding of fact - Defendant 2’s misunderstanding of the lower judgment - Co-Defendant 3’s co-Defendant 3’s co-defendantd to Q company, and asked for protection to prevent harm from the victim R, and did not interfere with a residential intrusion as indicated in the instant facts charged.

In addition, since R did not know Q, at the time of the instant case, R exclusively occupied and managed the buildings of Q Q company.

Therefore, as long as R does not have a legal interest in the protection of the crime of intrusion upon residence, the defendant does not constitute a special crime of intrusion on residence.

Nevertheless, the lower court: (a) instigated the Defendant into a residential intrusion as indicated in the facts charged of the instant case;

Based on the judgment of the court below, the facts charged against the defendant.