The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 법리오해 1) 피고인이 배우자인 B과 다투다 B이 안방에 들어가 나오지 않자 B을 나오게 할 생각으로 벽에 걸려 있던 달력에 불을 붙인 것은 사실이다. 그러나 피고인은 자신의 유일한 재산인 주택에 불을 붙일 생각이 없었고, 달력에 불이 붙자 곧바로 달력을 잡아당겨 바닥으로 떨어뜨린 다음 밟아 불을 껐기에 벽에 불이 옮겨붙지도 않았다. 또한 피고인의 주택은 불연재로 시공되어 있어 연소의 가능성도 없었다. 따라서 피고인이 현주건조물방화 범행의 실행에 착수하였다고 볼 수 없고, 피고인에게 방화의 고의가 있었다고 볼 수도 없다. 2) 피고인이 현주건조물방화 범행의 실행에 착수하였다고 보더라도 피고인은 자신의 행위를 자의로 중지하거나 그 행위로 인한 결과를 방지하였다.

Therefore, the punishment against the defendant should be exempted in accordance with Article 26 of the Criminal Code.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (nine months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Regarding the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, in the case of a crime of fire-fighting in the form of which the crime of fire-fighting is to be destroyed by means of extinguishment through media, whether the defendant started to commit the crime of fire-fighting on the present state, and whether there was intention or not, the crime of fire-fighting was commenced even if the defendant did not move to the object itself due to the reason that the crime was put on the media, or the act of the criminal was put on the media, if the defendant was in a situation where the act of fire can continue to be done by putting it up, it shall be deemed that there was the commencement of the crime of fire-fighting. The issue of whether there was commencement of the crime in a specific case is the intention or awareness of the defendant at the time of the crime, the method and form of the crime, the situation at the scene of the crime and surrounding areas, and the kind