The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of mistake: No one does assault a police officer as stated in this part of the facts charged, with regard to the obstruction of performance of official duties.

B. Legal principles: Regarding the entry into a residence, the entry of the defendant is generally permitted, and the entry is not contrary to the victim's intent, and therefore, the entry into a residence does not constitute a crime.

C. Mental and physical disorder: As to the remaining injury, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime.

Unfair sentencing: The sentencing of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant's assertion on mistake of facts is not accepted since it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant assaulted the police officer F.

B. In the crime of intrusion upon residence alleged in the misapprehension of the legal principle, the residence refers to the residence itself, not merely a house itself, but includes the summary of the residence.

Therefore, stairs and corridors used for public use in multi-family housing, such as multi-household houses, multi-household houses, non-family houses, and apartment houses, are necessarily annexed to the exclusive part of each household or household used as a residence, and there is a need for the residents to monitor and manage in their daily lives and to protect the peace of de facto residence. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it constitutes “human residence” which is the object of the crime of intrusion upon residence.

In this place, intrusion against the will of the resident constitutes a crime of intrusion upon residence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3452 Decided August 20, 2009). In this case, the Defendant is sufficiently recognized by the evidence that the Defendant was going to the front of the third floor entrance in which the victim resides through the stairs going against the victim D’s will and going to the front of the third floor entrance. As such, the Defendant’s act constitutes a crime of intrusion upon residence.

Therefore, it is true.