The Defendants did not pay the above fine.

On March 8, 2017, around 13:30 on March 8, 2017, the Defendants were unable to smoked tobacco at the victim G warehouse, which is operated by the victim E in Gwangju-si, with the trade name “F”.

At the same time, the horses, etc., which can be easily attached to fire, had a lot of winded and dried. As such, the Defendants had a duty of care to prevent fire in advance by completely removing the fire of a cigarette butts, and by preventing the fire from being put to a stuff, vinyl, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected this and caused a cigarette butts to be put to a ice stuff, etc. by negligence while leaving the cigarette butts completely, and continued to spread to the victim G logistics outer wall owned by the victim G and cosmetics owned by the victim E, etc. owned by the victim E, which were kept in the storage.

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collusion and negligence, destroyed the amount equivalent to 30,932,006 won of the cost of repairing goods owned by the Victim G, and destroyed the amount of 153,879,008 won of the market price owned by the Victim E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Statement protocol by the police of G and E;

1. Investigation report (on-site inspection and CCTV analysis, and statement of suspects);

1. A statement of computation of losses;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on fire site photographs;

1. The Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 170(1), 164(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act (including the Defendants)

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The circumstances in which the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is unfavorable to the Defendants: the crime of this case is committed by the Defendants’ setting fire to the warehouse and goods of the victims who have abandoned cigarette butts in bad faith, and the degree of negligence is heavy, and the victim’s damage therefrom seems to be considerable: the Defendants are against the law, and there is no criminal history.