logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.14 2014고합409
현주건조물방화미수
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2014. 10. 3. 18:50경 서울 광진구 D에 있는 피해자 E의 집 앞에 이르러 피해자가 피고인과 말다툼을 하다가 경찰에 신고하였다는 이유로 화가 나 일회용 라이터와 담배로 종이에 불을 붙이고 이를 피해자의 집 창문 안으로 던져 침대와 벽지에 불이 붙게 하였으나 마침 지나가던 F이 이를 발견하고 위 집에 들어가 물을 뿌려 불을 껐다.

Accordingly, the defendant was trying to kill the building used as a residence, which was destroyed by fire.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of F, E, and G;

1. Reporting on the occurrence of a fire, reporting on the results of field identification, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 174 and 164 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the grounds of suspended sentence”) is a crime in which the defendant raised a dispute with the victim who was male or female, and the victim attempts to resist his/her residence without contact. It is a crime that is likely to cause property damage and human life damage. In addition, the victim’s residence is highly likely to cause damage to neighboring generations if a large number of houses are spread, and the victim’s residence is highly likely to cause damage to neighboring generations. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and opposed to the attempted crime of this case, the crime of this case was committed in many parallels, and the size of property damage is relatively minor, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment at the age of 20 years, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim.

arrow