A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On November 30, 2017, around 16:25, the Defendant entered the office of the Association of the Association of the Association for the Development and Improvement of D Housing Redevelopment in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Building C, and requested the victim E, who is an employee of the said office, to submit a written response to the request for disclosure of information, but hearing the victim's statement that it is necessary to submit the power of attorney to the union member or the proxy from the injured party, and rather, requested the victim to present a letter of appointment that can prove that the injured party is an employee, and reported the above documents to the victim without permission, and even though the injured party demanded the removal and removal from the office, the Defendant failed to comply with the request due to the absence of the above office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to investigative reports (Attachment of CCTV images and conversation recording files submitted by a complainant), CCTV images, and dialogue recording files;

1. Article 319(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 319 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Reasons for conviction under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment;

1. Whether or not the withdrawal order is constituted;

A. The crime of intrusion upon residence and non-compliance with the relevant legal principles is de facto protecting the peace of residence, and thus, whether a resident or a person between the residents has a right to live or to be confined to a structure does not depend on the establishment of the crime, but possession by a person who has no right to occupy.

Even though the peace of residence should be protected, if the right holder intrudes on the residence or structure without following the procedure prescribed by the law in realizing his right, the crime of intrusion is established, and if the right holder fails to comply with the demand for the eviction at the place, the crime of refusing to leave is established (Supreme Court Decision 194.4.).