A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On March 3, 2017, at around 22:30, the Defendant, while drunk in “D” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, posted a newspaper, etc. in his possession of about 40 candlelights (2m x vertical length 1m x 2m x 2m m) and posted it by inserting it, and caused public danger by setting fire inside the candlelight slelight and its inside and outside the candlelight slelight.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. E statements;

1. Investigation report (the call of a security guard who finds the site first);

1. Application of course photographs, photographs of belongings at the time of committing a crime, and statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 167 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. Grounds for conviction under Article 62-2 (1) and proviso to paragraph (2) of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation;

1. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant was trying to use the two seconds used in the candlelight slelight slelight, and the candlelight slelelight slelights were cut down. Therefore, there was no intention to prevent fire, and the candlelight slelights were in favor of alklights, and there was no danger that it might spread out from the surrounding building, such as the legal slelights. Therefore, there was no danger to the public.

2. Determination

A. The term “public danger” under Article 167(1) of the Criminal Act, which provides for the crime of fire-prevention of general goods, refers to a specific danger that may infringe on the life, body, or property of an unspecified or large number of people, and whether such danger may result in such an infringement in light of the empirical rule based on specific circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12947, Jan. 14, 2010). B. The following facts and circumstances are revealed in full view of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court.

1) The Defendant’s newspaper site, etc. are examined by the military court and the military court.