The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) Since the Defendant, by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, invaded on a structure for the purpose of crime, thereby impairing the peace of the building manager, the crime of intrusion on the structure was established, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too uneasy and unfair.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles, and the victim G's spread and new outbreak are articles that the above victim attempted to throw away from the corridor, and thus, the court below found Defendant 1 guilty of this part of the facts charged, but did not constitute another person's property, and there is an error of

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges on this part on the ground that the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, based on the evidence in its holding, found the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts and the fact that (i) the victim left the stairs intending to throw away the damaged goods, not the stairs intending to put them out, and (ii) the damaged goods were small but have economic value, and (iii) the victim made a statement to the effect that it is difficult for the Defendant to accept the damaged goods without the consent.

Examining the above judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles as alleged by the defendant, which affected the conclusion

subsection (b) of this section.

B. Determination 1 on the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine) The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a commercial building located in Busan B in Jun. 17, 2018.