The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court to the accused (two years of imprisonment) against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the fact that the defendant divided his mistake and immediately surrenders himself; (b) the elderly; (c) the fact that the present disability remains due to the fall accident in 1994 (Grade III); (d) the fact that the defendant had no previous conviction after 1980; and (e) the fact that the house owner may take out fire insurance and receive compensation for damage.

On the other hand, there is no reason to consider the motive for the crime of this case, and there was a serious damage to the room of the defendant's stay due to the crime of this case. In addition, the building of the defendant's fire-fighting is the second floor, the rooftop, and the first floor of the second floor of the ground, and the second floor of the underground, which had been living in six households, so a large amount of human life damage may occur due to fire, and the house owner's failure to recover damage from the defendant, which

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines (one year to six years of imprisonment), it is difficult to deem that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.