A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that the defendant does not actually infringe the defendant's right of defense, some of the charges were revised.

On November 13, 2018, the Defendant waited for C in the influence of alcohol at the 1st floor of the 1st floor of the house of the Heunggu-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, G, and C, the second floor of the house of the Singu, G, and C, which is a village type B and B, and attempted to commit the Defendant’s refusal to borrow money, with the intention of “no money.” The Defendant put the Defendant into a multi-household housing building where the house was in possession of a tool for the abolition he was accumulated under the stairs. However, even though the Defendant failed to commit the Defendant’s attempted to commit the act of spreading the fire on the wind of the fire officers dispatched upon receiving a report from neighboring residents.

Accordingly, the defendant was trying to fire a structure that many people use as a residence by setting fire, such as C, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol of partial police interrogation of the accused;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of on-site identification reports and on-site photographs statutes;

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

1. Article 25 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of attempted crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act regarding orders to provide community service and attend lectures

1. The assertion;

A. Although the Defendant attached a fire at a place indicated in the facts constituting a crime, the Defendant did not intend to attach a multi-household housing building (hereinafter “the instant building”) as indicated in the facts constituting a crime, and the place where the Defendant attached a fire did not have any intention to attach it to the instant structure or another structure near the instant structure or its neighboring area. As such, the crime of attempted fire prevention is not recognized on the grounds that the Defendant did not have any intention to attach it to the instant structure or its neighboring structure.

(b).