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

On June 25, 2015, around 12:30 on June 25, 2015, the Defendant moved to the d-building 4th C-21 of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which was owned and managed by the Victim C by the Defendant, using a d-roter and paper that was in a non-fluence of his wife’s wife, and attached a fire to the non-fluoring room.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed part of the building used as a residence by the victim, etc. so that the amount of 1.5 million won of the repair cost can be reduced.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Article 164 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of limited imprisonment for a crime;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation;

1. Persons who are not subject to punishment in the mitigated area (one year and six months from June to three years) (special mitigation) of category 1 (Setting fire to Present Living Building, etc.) and the general criteria for the sentencing criteria;

2. Determination of sentence: One year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and probation case is a matter of fire in the studio room room room room room room room room room room room room which the defendant uses as a residence. Fire prevention of a building used by many people as a residence is highly likely to cause serious harm to the lives and property of the majority, and the minimum statutory penalty for the crime of this case is three years of imprisonment, etc., the nature of the crime of this case is not weak.

However, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant; the fire was extinguishmented early; the actual damage was not significant; the defendant committed the crime of this case in a contingent manner by taking advantage of his wife while drinking alcohol; the defendant did not have any criminal records of the same kind or sentence; and the defendant did not have any criminal records of the same kind.