The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the preliminary fire-prevention of an existing structure even though the defendant did not have an intention to prevent the apartment at the time of the crime in this case, was erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the imprisonment of August, the fine of KRW 500,00, the penalty of KRW 1,200) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, it is established when the crime of setting fire to the existing structure under Article 175 of the Criminal Act is prepared to be committed with the intent to commit the crime of setting fire to the existing structure. In order to establish the crime of setting fire to the existing structure, it is required to separately commit the crime of setting fire to the existing structure beyond intent, as an excessive subjective illegal element

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, it is judged that the defendant had the purpose of committing the crime of harming the existing structure at the time of the investment of gasoline.

① The Defendant alleged to the effect that he did not have any intention to prevent fire since he was married to the Defendant’s home. However, the Defendant’s husband and wife should not blick the gasoline.

In spite of the birth of gasoline, the Defendant’s father continued to spread the gasoline, and the Defendant’s father and wife also called “the Defendant’s husband and wife, so as to have the police get off the gasoline, so it is necessary to pay the liquor tax.”

② The Defendant did not open a door even at the time of the police’s opening of the door. Since then, the Defendant left a door before being seized by the police, even though he discarded tobacco as the Defendant’s stalk.

③ The Defendant, who was arrested, sent a statement to the effect that “to die gasoline” was sworn at a police station between the two police stations, and the Defendant’s father’s visit to the Defendant’s wife was closed, and made a statement to the effect that the Defendant intended to kill the Defendant’s wife (i.e., I earth’s file CD).