A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 23:10 on February 27, 2015, the Defendant, at the E company operated by the victim D (the 54 years of age) who is the husband of Asan City C, was not suspected that the victim would have a wind with the female personnel in charge of the company's accounting, and was placed in the company dormitory without being able to bring about the said company's separation and removal site, factory entrance, front of the factory entrance, materials storage, etc. by attaching three fire to the above company's removal and removal site, separate removal facility, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed the victim's company's structure by setting fire.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the autopsy report on the occurrence of the case, investigation report (on the spot, victim and the counter investigation of the suspect), on-site photographs, on-site photographs, fire site photographs, fire safety accident guards, and on-site photographs and statutes;

1. Article 166 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the 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. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (a favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Judgment on the assertion that there was no fire in front of a material warehouse

A. The summary of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant added fire in front of the waste separation and removal site, factory entrance, but there was no fire in front of the material warehouse.

B. The judgment of this court is based on the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the police investigation report: ① At the time of site dispatch, the police officer’s investigation report was sent to three places adjacent to the workplace, the building site, and the building adjacent to the workplace, and the Defendant also stated that he was posted to F, who was leaving the workplace within the company’s dormitory, and was placed in the car log in a three place outside the factory. ② The above three places can be confirmed by fire in the field photograph, and ③ the victim D also to the same purport.