Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant from February 2018 to the same year

3. up to May, 3, a person who had worked in D stores operated by the victims C in the Daegu Metropolitan City Suwon-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, as an employee.

On March 5, 2018, the Defendant, at around 11:28, had a duty of care to keep the burners continuously in regulating the influent century so that drinking milk may not be dried up, because the Defendant, on the ground that he was fluored by fluoring the fluor in order to refluorize the fluoring, etc. of the above abrush, he had a duty of care to keep the burners down.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and put panty Ber, which contains food milk above, and caused a fire at around 11:57 on the same day due to the negligence of 11:57 on the same day and caused a fire to the kitchen, upper part, and the main part of the above D shop operated by the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the property equivalent to KRW 40 million at the market price owned by the victim by neglecting his/her duties, such as making the victim d shop located in D, operated by the victimized person due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Reports on internal investigation (the sequence 11, 12 of the evidence list);

1. The fire identification report (the defendant and his defense counsel argued to the effect that the situation at the time of a fire is not memory and the charges of this case are denied, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence are presumed to have started in the pande of the auxiliary bank, namely, the fire of this case is presumed to have started inside the auxiliary bank, the valve at the time is deemed to have been open, the cause of combustion except the gas burner is difficult to find, and the defendant stated that there was no fact that there was no fire to the gas burner at the time of a day specified in the facts charged. However, according to CCTV images, the CCTV images opened the main door and took gas control fire as his hand, and the middle valves of gas are taken.