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

After closing a Chinese restaurant operated for not less than 15 years as an employee of a restaurant operated by another person, the defendant thought that he was able to commit a fire to the remaining carics in which he was influent with his own faith while working as an employee of the restaurant operated by another person.

1. On February 6, 2013, around 21:55, the Defendant attached a studio in the victim D’s studio at the construction site of Geum-gu, Busan, to a studio for the prevention of dust installed on the left side of the newly constructed building.

As a result, the defendant destroyed the 96,000 won of the market price owned by the victim and caused public danger.

2. On February 7, 2013, at the same place as the preceding paragraph, the Defendant attached a fire to a subdivision for the prevention of dust installed on the right side of the building being newly constructed in the same manner as that of the preceding paragraph.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed 1 strawls equivalent to 12,00 won of the market price owned by the victim and caused public danger.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. On-site reports on results of field identification;

1. Application of CCTV photographs to the crime scene;

1. Article 167 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. From among concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in paragraph (1) of the same Article as the case with heavier punishment);

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigations under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances in the rear);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (wholly favorable circumstances to be considered in the rear);

1. In light of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. [the scope of punishment] Imprisonment with prison labor for six months to seven years [the sentence] imprisonment for eight months, and the suspension of execution for two years, the instant fire-fighting crime may cause serious damage to the life and property of an unqualified person, and thus, its social risk is very high, and the instant fire-fighting was repeated at the same place in the night over this framework.