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 becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On November 10, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Sungnam District Court of Suwon on November 10, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 18, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

On April 2015, the Defendant, at the “E” store operated by the victim D in Gwangju-si, had worked as a part-time feet, and had been dissatisfied with less wages, and had raised a complaint to correct it into the above furniture store material storage.

On September 19, 2015, the Defendant, at around 17:50, up to September 17, 2015, attached fire to the large tree shot at the entrance of the warehouse, and made it spread to the ceiling within the warehouse.

Accordingly, the defendant set fire to the furniture materials storage owned by the victim so that approximately one million won of the repairing cost can be cut off.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the defendant against the defendant;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. On-site photographs and details of the report;

1. A report on investigation (Attachment of a black box image with a recording page) and a report on investigation (report on the listening of scams);

1. Before the judgment: Criminal records [the defendant and his defense counsel argued to the effect that he denies the criminal intent of fire, but the defendant directly observed that he had the fluenite to attach a fire to the large tree, and because the victim did not have suffered money, the victim did not have so. So, the defendant attached a fluener on the tent floor because of the victim's lack of money. As such, the defendant's prosecutor's statement (the investigation record 101 pages) to the purport that "the defendant was moved to a tent, and the flusium was moved to the tent, and the flusium was moved to the tent." The defendant's statement (the investigation record 101 pages) to the effect that the flusium is sufficiently recognized (the counsel mentioned the possibility that the defendant could lose the fluenite, but it was not clear that the judgment was made, and the defendant stated so.