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

On January 9, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 23:48, 2015, at the househouse of D located in the Manan-gun, Chungcheongnam-do; (b) was under the influence of alcohol while he had a strong appraisal of D, he prepared in advance that D had a strong appraisal of D; and (c) was breading the volume of gasoline 1 liter into the newspaper by rater; and (d) had it spread on the floor, wall, etc. of the instant kitchen.

As a result, the defendant destroyed part of the owner of the D's house used as a residence, which is owned by D, that is, about five million won as repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police officer;

1. Application of on-site identification reports and on-site photographs statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 164 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the “justifiable circumstances”) of the suspended sentence;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one year and six months to fifteen years; and

2. Where the mitigation area (one year and six months to three years), mitigation area (special mitigation), (one year and six months to six years), a penalty not to be imposed, or a considerable damage has been restored to a certain part, within the scope of recommendation [the scope of recommendation] according to the sentencing criteria set forth in the general standards; and

3. Comparison scope of sentence and recommended sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months to three years; and

4. Determination of sentence: One year and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution are crimes committed by the Defendant by spreading gasoline at the home room of D, and fire prevention against such residential buildings is a highly dangerous crime that may infringe on the lives and property of many and unspecified persons and public safety, and thus, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant significantly.

However, the Defendant recognized the facts charged in the instant case and opposed thereto, and paid the full amount of KRW 5 million to D, and agreed with D, and the Defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime.