A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

Punishment of the crime

On November 26, 2014, around 02:30 on November 26, 2014, the Defendant found that he was fluored to the D Company's office located in the 14th floor of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C, but the door was locked, and the door was fluored, but the door was fluored, and the door was fluord to the number height installed at the steel entrance, and the cigarette was fluored so that the fire was not easily attached.

피고인은 이에 위 C 건물 1층 E 매장 가림천막에 위 라이터를 사용하여 불을 붙였으나, 곧 뒤따라온 경비원 F가 불을 껐다.

Accordingly, the defendant tried to commit a crime against C Building F, etc. residing in F, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. Statement of police seizure;

1. Each investigation report (including data appended respectively);

1. Application of 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. Articles 25 (2) and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act, which are statutory mitigation;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( normal consideration in favor of the accused among the reasons for sentencing below);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for nine months to seven years; and

2. The range of recommending sentencing criteria - The sentencing criteria shall not apply to an attempted crime; and

2. It is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to a punishment, considering the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the suspension of execution, etc., the place where the Defendant attempted to prevent a fire is a large-scale complex office, the property loss and human life damage to the large number of commercial buildings located in the above building was likely to occur.

However, considering the fact that the defendant agreed with the victims, the crime of this case was committed in the attempted attempt, the degree of damage was not significant, and the defendant reflects his mistake, the age, occupation, character and conduct of the defendant.