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

On May 2015, the Defendant was hospitalized in the hospital located in the former North Korean territory C for the purpose of treating alcohol survival. However, on February 20, 2016, the Defendant was forced to discharge the hospital on the grounds of violent nature, such as taking a bath to the doctor and nurse, etc. On February 20, 2016, the Defendant lived with the victim and the type G at the house of the victim F, the mother of the son E located in the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.

Around March 4, 2016, the Defendant thought that he was neglected to ordinary family members, and had his family members flicked with the Victim’s house at around 19:55, the Defendant had a 59 square meters of the total floor area of slive house with a stringer (Evidence No. 1) attached to the bruma cremation and paper stuff on the part of this flick, which was being attached to the floor, and had it spread to a building with a 59 square meters of the total floor area of slive house.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed the above victim and two family members by burning one house under the market price, which is the victim's ownership, which is used as a residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 164 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 164 of the choice of punishment (Optional to Imprisonment with labor for a period of time);

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing shall be considered in consideration of favorable circumstances in consideration of the amount of punishment):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following sentencing has been repeated for more favorable circumstances);

1. Protective observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc.;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical weakness under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act, the Defendant’s defense counsel at the time of committing the instant crime, which was in a mental and physical weak state due to symptoms of mental illness and the main work

The argument is asserted.

In full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant was given diagnosis and treatment prior to the instant crime; (b) the background, means and methods of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant’s attitude and behavior before and after the instant crime; and (d) the circumstances after the instant crime.