The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is living together with the victim C and is involved.

On August 2, 2017, around 10:30, the Defendant sent a door to bring the Defendant’s goods used at the time of living in the residence of the victim No. 2401, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, Seoul. However, it was impossible to enter the entrance, thereby entering the entrance without the consent of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant infringed upon another person's residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that, at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant had no intention to intrude upon his residence because he had been living together with the victim without completely resolving his living relationship with the victim, and that such act constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against social norms.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, ① the Defendant visited the victim’s house at least three times a week, and the Defendant’s personal goods were in the victim’s house, but there was a separate residence of the Defendant, ② the Defendant was in the victim’s house on July 31, 2017, but the Defendant was in the victim’s house and entered the victim’s house by not opening the victim’s house with a view to opening the door (19 pages of evidence record), ③ the Defendant was in the victim’s house to arrange the Defendant’s own house at night on August 1, 2017.

Although contact was made, it is said that the victim would directly arrange for the communication.

In full view of the fact that the defendant clearly expresses his intention (the 25th page of the evidence record), (4) the victim changed the identification number of the present official after the visit of the defendant on July 31, 2017 (the 19th page of the evidence record), etc., the officetels of this case is the co-residential residence of the defendant and the victim.