The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On the day of the instant case, the Defendant sent the victim the word “to put him in place his house”, the Defendant could have known that the act of attaching a fire to the suspension immediately adjacent to a large number of carbons could be caused by that act, and if the house was put in place for suicide, at least dolusent perception exists if the Defendant committed a crime for suicide.

According to the on-site photographs at the time, the court below did not recognize the defendant's intention of fire prevention and the commencement of fire prevention by misunderstanding the fact, despite the fact that there was a possibility of partially relocating a stop with a fire attached to it, and that the fire might have been caused by this, etc.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years and six months of imprisonment, and four years of suspended execution) is too unhutiled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts reveals the following circumstances, namely, that the Defendant sent text messages to the effect that “the Defendant would abandon his house to the victim,” and that “the victim’s parents will die,” even before sending text messages to the effect that “the victim’s parents will die,” is more likely to be considered as mere threat of harm and injury, rather than having expressed specific intent of action. The Defendant’s bomb and stop are more larger than that of the bomb (the investigation record 53,60 pages) and the surrounding area of the bomb (the investigation record 53,60 pages) and there seems to be little room to move to another place even if the Defendant had been put to the 45 inner bombane, and there seems to have been no reason to set the bomb as follows.