The man who paid off the house downstairs… The “up and down” judge solved it like a puzzle

Opening a door lock in an apartment in downtown Seoul. Not related to the content of the article. [연합뉴스]

It is a part of the ruling against A, a man in his twenties, who was charged with attempting to enter the house while trying to enter the lower-level woman’s four-digit password. In July 2019, Mr. A, who lives on the 3rd floor of a multi-family house (villa) in Gangbuk-gu, Seoul, entered the password of Mr. B’s house on the second floor, which is the lower floor of him. At the time, Mr. A found Mr. B at home and ran away.

At the trial, Mr. A stated that he had mistaken Mr. B’s house as his own because he was confused about the number of floors while climbing the stairs while looking at the gas bill (Jiro Yongji) taken out of the mailbox at the time. He continued to look at Jiro Yongji in front of the front door and pressed the door lock password as usual, but he denied his charges, saying that the front door was opened unintentionally.

At this time, the court determined the path of hand movement with the defendant’s front door door lock password A, B, C, D, and the victim’s password D, B, C, A. “The defendant and the victim’s residential door lock passwords consist of the same A, B, C, D, but when the actual password is pressed with a different number in the order, the movement of the hand (movement path) does not overlap at all.” “As the defendant claimed, if the defendant pressed the password without looking at the door lock, he would have moved his hand as usual. (But) it is hard to believe that the front door was opened by accidentally pressing the password of the door lock of the victim’s residence, which required a completely different movement.”

Regarding the claim that Mr. A went up the stairs when looking at the gas bill, and pressed the door lock password while looking at the paper, the judge said, “The stairs and corridors were in light of the structure of the building and the location and shape of windows at sunset in the summer. It seems to have been in the dark.”

The judge also said, “Sensors are installed on the stairs and corridors, but considering the fact that if you move while looking at something, you usually slow down, the sensor lights are continuously turned on so that the defendant can continue reading and moving. I wonder if the condition was maintained.” The fact that Mr. A’s statement was overturned several times also affected.

The judge also pointed out Mr. A’s attitude. The judge said, “If the defendant had opened the victim’s front door by a simple mistake, as the defendant claimed, he would have been able to explain the situation to the victim and ask for forgiveness as much as possible.” “Even though the defendant clearly knew that the police were looking for him, “It doesn’t appear to be the attitude of a person who perceives his or her actions as a simple mistake, such as leaving a letter and a drink without revealing his/her personal information in front of the victim’s front door.”

For this reason, Judge Kim Young-ho, the eighth criminal law of the Northern Seoul District Law, sentenced Mr. A to four months in prison and two years probation and ordered probation.

Reporter Jeong Hee-yoon [email protected]