Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 20, 2012, the Defendant, on February 20, 2009, transferred the ownership of KRW 30,000,00,000, which the Defendant borrowed from a national bank from the Korean bank, to the victim under the name of the Defendant instead of acting on behalf of the victim, but there was a dispute between the victim and the victim, who was living in the above apartment, with the Defendant’s father, etc., for the following reasons: (a) although the Defendant was willing to sell the above apartment to others; and (b) the Defendant’s father, etc., demanded the victim living in the above apartment to move out the above apartment.

On March 20, 2012, the Defendant opened the entrance door of the above apartment, which was not locked for the purpose of hospitaling the father of the Defendant into the hospital, and intruded into the victim’s residence.

2. On April 6, 2012, the Defendant: (a) infringed upon the residence of April 6, 2012; and (b) infringed upon the exercise of the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right to exercise the right

As a result, the defendant damaged the automatic locking device of the above apartment owned by the defendant, which is the purpose of possession of the victim B, thereby obstructing the victim's exercise of rights, and invaded upon the victim's residence.

3. On May 29, 2012, the Defendant: (a) confirmed that the victim B newly installed the automatic locking system of the instant apartment site at around 18:00 on May 29, 2012; and (b) entered the said apartment site after having the victim remove the automatic locking system in the same manner as described in paragraph (2).

Accordingly, the defendant damages the automatic locking device, which is owned by the defendant, which is the purpose of possession of the victim B.