Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of 3,000,000 won.

Defendant .

A. The lower court convicted Defendant A of the instant facts charged against Defendant A on the basis of Defendant B’s statement that “the tobacco butts, which the Defendant did not take off, were satisfyed to have a satch and packaging vinyl,” and Defendant B had sufficient motive to make a false statement in order to avoid his/her civil and criminal liability, since the conflict of interest with the Defendant A, Defendant B has sufficient motive to make a false statement in order to avoid his/her civil and criminal liability. Therefore, his/her statement

In addition, in light of the fact that the fire occurred after the lapse of eight minutes after Defendant A got out of tobacco, and LA, which had been delivered to the Defendant’s store at the time, did not witness any signs related to the fire, it is reasonable that the fire occurred due to the third party’s intervention or other causes, and thus, the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A cannot be deemed as sufficiently proven.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

나. 검사 원심은 피고인 B의 행위로 인하여 이 사건 화재가 발생하였음을 인정하기 어렵고, 피고인 B에게 화재 발생 위험이 있는지를 확인할 형법상 주의의무가 없다는 이유로 피고인 B에 대하여 무죄를 선고하였으나, 피고인 B도 담뱃재를 손가락으로 털었던 사실은 인정하고 있고, 피고인 A이 자리를 먼저 뜨는 바람에 피고인 B이 담배를 어떻게 껐는지 목격한 사람은 없지만 화재 현장에 마지막까지 남아 있던 피고인 B의 행위로 이 사건 화재가 발생하였을 개연성도 충분하다.

In addition, even if Defendant B’s cigarette butts do not cause a fire, Defendant B consistently enters the first place after smoking tobacco, and does not take out to the strawer and packing vinyl.