A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant had a complaint on the ground that the defendant's wife C was negligent in bringing up his child while working as a restaurant employee.

At around 12:50 on April 21, 2013, the Defendant: (a) laid the bottled with the Defendant’s body on the floor that the Victim E operated by the victim E in the Newannam-gun, Nannam-gun, for the reason that the Defendant did not send the Defendant’s body to the Defendant’s house; (b) laid the bottled with the Defendant’s body, which contained a new and new age, and was in possession; and (c) laid the bottled with the Defendant’s body, put it into a stop; (d) however, the Defendant did not serve as the Defendant’s employees G was able to promptly stop the said restaurant

Thus, the defendant tried to fire a building in which people exist by setting fire, but did not commit an attempted crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. G statements;

1. Protocols of seizure and the list of seized articles and photographs;

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, which committed the crime of this case on the grounds of suspended execution, is attempted to prevent the defendant from committing an attempted crime to a general restaurant with many and unspecified persons, and may cause damage to the life and property of the deceased. Thus, the nature of the crime is not weak.

However, in consideration of the records and various sentencing conditions shown in the trial process, such as the fact that the defendant reflects his/her own crime, the grhe/she did not cause any particular property damage, the victim does not want to punish the defendant, and the defendant has no criminal history exceeding the fine, etc., the sentence against the defendant shall be determined as the order of the defendant.