주거침입죄의 성립 여부 - 대상판결 : 대법원 2022.3.24. 선고, 2017도18272 전원합의체 판결 -

In the past, the Supreme Court acknowledged the establishment of a housing trespass crime as the defendant entered a restaurant pretending to be a customer for the purpose of installing a wiretapping device and would not have allowed the restaurant owner to enter if he had known this fact. However, if the defendant entered the restaurant with the owner's consent, it was assumed that the owner would not have accepted the entry if he knew the actual purpose, but it was judged that it was an intrusion based on whether it violated de facto serenity of the house at the time of entry. This is thought to be an aspect that the Supreme Court seems to have been overly preoccupied with the aspect of intrusion in the process of argument, regardless of whether the crime of residential intrusion was established. Even if the protection of the crime of invasion is viewed as de facto serenity, the intrusion itself should be judged based on the resident's intention, and the normative evaluation of the judgment of the majority opinion in the target judgment is very ambiguous. The establishment of the crime of home invasion has a great impact on the general public, as the court of the 2020do12630 ruling said in a public hearing. Therefore, the meaning of the target judgment is important, and this is why clearer judgment standards are needed.