1.(a)

Plaintiff

A and B, Defendant H and I shared KRW 204,487,989, Defendant F and G jointly with Defendant H and I.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant H was diagnosed as having an excessive behavioral disorder (ADD) at the hospital around September 2014 as a student in the first grade of high school, and was diagnosed as having an excessive behavioral disorder (ADD) at the hospital, and was treated as such, Defendant H had a drum on the “L” (hereinafter “the instant music institute”) located in Ansan-gu and in the second level from March 7, 2016.

B. At around 19:20 on April 1, 2016, Defendant H entered the music private teaching institute of this case, and discovered a disposable tool located far from the head of the drum practice room and the wall’s wall while having the drum, Defendant H destroyed the internal decoration, furniture, and musical instruments inside the music private teaching institute of this case by putting a fire on the inner wall with the drum training room where the drum training room and the inner wall where the drums were emitted from the wall, notwithstanding M’s delivery, Defendant H destroyed the internal decoration, furniture, and musical instruments inside the music private teaching institute of this case by spreading poisonous gas and heat to the entire inside of the drum.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). C.

P due to the fire of this case, the students N and other training rooms in other drum training rooms in other drum training rooms in the music institute of this case died due to addiction, quality, etc. by poisonous gas.

On September 30, 2016, Defendant H was sentenced to a maximum of nine years of imprisonment and a short of five years of imprisonment in this court (2016Gohap108), and Defendant H appealed appealed against this, but the appeal was dismissed on January 12, 2017 (Seoul High Court 2016No3266) and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

In light of the various circumstances such as the background and means of the instant crime, the behavior of the Defendant after the commission of the crime, the process of the instant crime by the Defendant, and the result of the mental appraisal against the Defendant, the court held that the Defendant had the weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the foregoing disability at the time of the instant crime.