logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.04.20 2015노3706
주거침입등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding or the misapprehension of legal principles, the house listed in paragraph (2) of the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “the instant house”) was frequently located, and thus, the Defendant’s entering the instant house without obtaining permission from the victim G cannot be deemed to constitute a crime of intrusion upon residence. However, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence that the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the sentencing unfair is too unreasonable. (The penalty amounting to KRW 4,00,000)

2. Determination

A. Regarding the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the residence in the crime of intrusion upon residence does not necessarily need to be present at all times, and thus, it can be a temporary residence. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim was placed in a situation where he would be staying in the city of business, with no return of lease deposit, and the victim was placed in the situation where he would be staying in the city of business, and the entrance was corrected to prevent others from entering the house of this case without any choice. ② The defendant made a consistent statement as to the circumstances in which he obtained the entrance key, ② the defendant made a false statement, and the victim was aware that the existing correction device was replaced by the numberkk, and the victim was in possession of the entrance key. On the contrary, in light of the facts against the defendant, the victim was aware that the existing correction device was replaced by the unit.

The following facts are considered: ③ The victim arranged postal items in the instant house once a week or ten days, and inspected the internal conditions thereof; ④ The victim temporarily takes the telecom in the astronomical City because the problems of the lease deposit have not been settled; ⑤ The victim is not only the business issues in the court of the original instance, but also the housing of this case until the deposit is returned.

arrow