beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although there was a fact that the defendant of mistake of facts incinerated back in the vicinity of the warehouse of this case, there was no causation between the defendant's act and the occurrence of the fire of this case.
B. The lower court’s sentence is too heavy.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, it is reasonable to deem that the instant fire occurred due to the Defendant’s act of incineration on the back of the back
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and it cannot be said that there was an error affecting the judgment by misunderstanding facts.
1) The Defendant incinerated the front door of the instant warehouse, and the instant fire occurred between the rear side of the instant warehouse and the fence. Considering the size of the instant warehouse (total floor area of 3 square meters), the distance between the location presumed to be the place where the Defendant performed incineration and the place where the Defendant was presumed to be the place where the fire was burned, appears to have been extremely adjacent to less than 2 meters. (ii) Considering that the following parts of the instant warehouse and the wall presumed to be the place where the instant warehouse were burned, which were presumed to be the place where the fire was burned, a fire was likely to occur solely due to the extreme combustion factors, such as waste oil stuff, and that at the time, it was lower at the time.
3) The Defendant voluntarily stated to the effect that “the fire was caused due to the king A4 caused it to go by the police. The same shall also apply to the case so doing.” The Defendant asserted that the instant fire occurred at the time when 30 to 40 minutes from the time of the incineration of the back page, but only there was no objective evidence or statement by which the Defendant can confirm the retirement of the back page, and only there was only only the Defendant’s assertion.
The defendant is about 14:30 from the time of retirement of the police.