A. The judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the instant facts charged, although the instant fire was not caused by the Defendant’s negligence, was erroneous by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of a fine of KRW 3 million sentenced by the court below which was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and examined at the lower court: (a) the burning shape of the instant fire takes the form spread from the lower part of the 5th floor air duct; (b) the 4th floor air duct connected to the 5th floor air duct; (c) the Defendant has a form more severe damage to the 5th floor; (d) the Defendant has an adjacent part to the 5th floor air duct; (e) it is difficult to take safety measures, such as spawning around the upper part of the 5th floor air duct to prevent fire; and (e) it is difficult to view the 5th floor air conditioned up to the lower court’s adjacent facilities, such as the 5th floor air conditioned up the 5th floor air duct; and (e) it is difficult to view the 5th floor air conditioned up to the 5th floor air conditioned up by the 5th floor air duct, and (e) it is difficult to view the two adjacent facilities of the 5th floor air duct to have been removed by the thickness of the 20m fire.