A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Criminal facts

When the Defendant operated a store with the trade name “D” in F, the Defendant provided a residential space inside and outside of the store and resided together with his family.

Around 19:55 on August 11, 2013, the Defendant destroyed a house owned by F-owned by the Defendant to ensure that the repair cost of KRW 3,859,500,00 should be borne by the Defendant’s children living together with his family, and the house owned by F-owned is destroyed by a fire to ensure that the repair cost of KRW 3,859,50,00 is borne by the Defendant’s children living together with his family, and the house owned by G-owned by G-owned by the Defendant to be repaired into the entire building of approximately 165 square meters in a prefabricated-distance prefabricated-type building where the width was spreaded, by taking away the house from the house located in the living room, and by using gas stamps in the kitchen, and by making the 5,346,453 won repair cost of G-owned house owned by G-owned by the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

Defendant’s legal statement

The crime of this case was committed on the grounds that the police officer’s statement F, G’s written statement investigation report (in relation to attachment of a quotation), Article 164(1) of the Act applicable to the criminal facts applicable to field photographic law and Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation of punishment (a favorable consideration in light of the reasons for sentencing) of the Act on Discretionary Mitigation of Sentence 164(1)3 (a) of the Criminal Act, since the crime of this case may cause serious danger and harm to public safety and peace, and may cause serious harm to the lives and property of neighbors, the crime of this case is not easy. The defendant committed the crime of this case on the grounds that it is difficult for them to understand that there is a long time for their computer games, and that there is a great possibility of criticism in light of the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, such as threatening their children to unfold even if they are inside their house.