Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the lessee of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Daudio 301.

On July 19, 2017, from around 04:00 to around 07:00, if the Defendant operates the electric rescept at the same place, the Defendant scam without completely extinguishing the electric rescam and the flames.

Around that time, due to the above negligence of the Defendant, he was fluorily fluoring on the electric lele, and fluorily fluoring on the surrounding objects, and fluored on the entire 5th floor of the brickd building through the leluor bank, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant laid down a building of 74.5 million won which is owned by 10 residents of 302 E, etc. in a residential building F(ma, 69 years old) and owned by 74.5 million won in a residential building.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. On-site reports on results of field identification, reports on fire identification, replys to requests for appraisal, application of Acts and subordinate statutes on cooperation and response to investigation;

1. Article 170 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are confined in a workhouse, [the defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the fire of this case is not caused by the act of the defendant.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., the instant fire that occurred in the Defendant’s room, i.e., there is no room for any other person than the Defendant to intervene; ii) the Defendant’s personality room was located between the OF and the 1st step, and in this case, the rashion continues to be repeated for 4 seconds, and the temperature of the rashion is coming up to 120 degrees, and the fire may occur sufficiently, and iii) the Defendant paid damages for the purpose of recognizing the responsibility for the occurrence of the fire in civil litigation, the above assertion is without merit.

The reason for sentencing is that there is no criminal punishment against the defendant.