All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) There was no intention to commit a fire against Defendant A.

(2) The lower court’s sentencing (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) There is no fact that the mistake of fact was made by Defendant B in the crime of Defendant A.

(2) The lower court’s sentencing (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of fact, it is sufficiently recognized that Defendant A had the victim who intentionally spreaded gasoline on fire prevention with a rater, and had the victim spread to the entire site office in the fluor.

Therefore, this part of Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

B. As to the Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant B and the defense counsel asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the above assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, we affirm the judgment of the court below and there is no illegality of misconception of facts as the grounds for appeal.

Therefore, this part of Defendant B’s assertion is without merit.

3. As to the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendants appears to have faithfully lived in the construction site, etc. prior to the instant crime, etc. before the instant crime was committed, there are grounds for the Defendants to be considered favorably in sentencing, such as the fact that the Defendants submitted the written application to the Defendants that they would have taken the Defendant’s wife against the Defendants, and that the Defendant A recognized the Defendants as substitute for the crime and reflected against the Defendants.

However, the crime of this case was committed in collusion by the Defendants by spreading gasoline in the victim’s body and attaching a fire. The crime of this case was very harsh, and the victim entered the victim’s body by committing the crime of this case.