The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the influence of drinking, and he was able to repent his mistake after committing the instant crime.

In addition, even though the crime of this case was committed, it did not cause harm to a third party's life or body due to the crime of this case, and there was no record that the defendant was punished for the criminal records of the same kind, such as fire prevention and fire extinguishment

Such circumstances are the circumstances that would be favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case committed by the defendant was committed on the ground that he did not receive wages properly, destroyed the place of business, and destroyed the place of business on the ground that he did not receive wages, and transferred the place of business to another adjacent place of business, and the crime is very dangerous and the result of the crime is also serious.

Nevertheless, there was no agreement with the victims.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of all the circumstances in the records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the offense, means and method of the offense, circumstances after the offense, and the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be excessively unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. However, the second instance court’s “No. 14, 2015.14” in the second instance court’s judgment is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “No. 4, 2015.11.4,” and thus, it is correct in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.