2. The conclusion that the Defendant made a confession and reflect on all of the instant crimes, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by contingency, and the Defendant’s failure to commit the instant crime is favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant in the subway station platform, putting the cremation site in the front-time train in a locking train, and thus, intending to prevent the electric vehicle and attempted to commit it. Considering that many citizens might suffer damage, the nature of the crime is not weak, and the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of indictment for the crime of prevention of public structure and fire in the subway station platform similar to this case at the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office on July 8, 2008, as well as the suspension of indictment for the act of putting the cremation in the subway station platform similar to this case. In addition, in consideration of the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case, the court below committed the crime of this case by unfairly reducing the punishment of other passengers in the knife (one year and six months), the previous train glass door in operation (2,300,000 won) and then, even if the defendant again was sentenced to the punishment of this case within the subway train, it cannot be considered that the court below committed the crime of this case unfairly.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.