All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, one year of suspension of qualifications, one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. Although the Prosecutor Defendant could fully recognize the fact that he recorded and heard another person’s conversation with the victim from March 2013 to February 9, 2014, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on this part by misunderstanding the fact.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant, around February 4, 2013, entered the password, which was discovered in advance, before the victim’s house located in Chuncheon City D and 107 Dong 1202, and opened an entrance and intrudes on the victim’s residence.

The Defendant installed a small tape recorder at each place and recorded and heard the conversation between the victim and others from March 2013 to February 9, 2014.

(2) The lower court and the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no evidence otherwise, in view of the fact that the victim had no real-time reception function in the above small recording machine discovered on February 9, 2014, etc., it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant had recorded and heard another person’s conversations with the victim from March 2013 to February 9, 2014.

Examining the records closely and closely, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing, where the Defendant intrudes on the house of the victim living separately and recorded and heard conversations between the victim and another person by installing a tape recorder in order to collect data favorable to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing in a divorce lawsuit, the crime’s nature and criminal circumstances are very bad. However, the Defendant’s previous conviction is limited to the Defendant’s punishment, and the age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime,