The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Of the facts charged in this case, the lower court found the Defendant B not guilty of the injury caused by the current structure and fire, dismissed the prosecution as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act, and sentenced a fine of KRW 300,000 on the conviction of the violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act. The prosecutor appealed on the acquittal part of the lower judgment on the ground of erroneous determination of facts and unfair sentencing. As a result, the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the violation of the Road Traffic Act are excluded from the scope of the trial of this court, since the judgment of this court is separated from the limit of the appeal period and excluded from the scope

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. With respect to the parts of the facts charged in the case of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the victim's injury to the present building and fire against Defendant B, each of the statements made by Defendant I, F, and Co-Defendant A, the victim of the present structure and fire-prevention, as witness, was consistent with the part that A returned to the back of the Defendant while she rootsed gasoline in the following behind the Defendant et al., and that the Defendant was made impreged, but the lower court denied credibility on the ground that each of the statements made by I and A was somewhat different in detailed contents from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: one and half years of suspended execution in one year and six months of imprisonment; and Defendant B: fine of 300,000 won) is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a single criminal trial on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and the recognition of conviction is reasonable.