However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On January 1, 2017, the Defendant: (a) at the office on duty located in the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of North Korea located in 33, 1570, Seo-dong, Busan, Busan, on January 1, 2017; (b) at the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the head of

In view of the employees working in the office room, gasoline is rootsd on the floor of the office room on duty and the body of the employees in the office room, and a person who is outside the office room on duty was not in possession of a doter and borrowed a doter to another person, and the person who works outside the office room on duty was deducted from the person who worked in the office in North-gu Office C on duty.

As a result, the defendant prepared to extinguish fire to the office of the duty of the North Korean office, which is a public building.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Each protocol of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A response to a request for appraisal, legal and chemical appraisal report;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report, investigative report (to listen to a wooden E-line statement, and to a police officer C's statement by a police officer of the North Korean Office);

1. Articles 175 and 165 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order and the protection observation, and Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order, on the ground that the Defendant, while drinking the female employee at his house, went back to the above female employee without going through a certain time, tried to control the above tea in the office of duty of the Busan Northernbuk-gu Office and call the phone, and the above employee of the office of duty was unable to control the present situation, and attempted to put the above employee into the office of duty, which is a public building, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment.

As above, in light of the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s committing the instant crime and the risk of the instant crime, the instant crime is not very good.

However, there are many material damage caused by the criminal act of the accused.