The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The fire of this case occurred due to a fire that fell away from the strings of a non-thring, due to the Defendant’s outbreak.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the record as follows, the court below’s detailed statement, it is not sufficient to recognize that the instant fire was caused by the Defendant’s unhulling of unhulled thrings due to the Defendant’s fire, solely by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

① There is a way to go through the front passage of the instant building to the front passage of the instant building, which is the location where a fire occurred, and a way to go to the front passage of the instant building. However, there is no CCTV image taken after the instant building, and there is no possibility that a person other than the Defendant and F might have been at the said point prior to the occurrence of a fire.

② As a result of a comprehensive review of the principles of combustion of a cigarette holder, F’s credibility of the statement, and the case of a paper-furning fire by a cigarette holder, etc., a written appraisal of the fire in this case conducted by the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, which was submitted at the trial, is difficult to readily conclude that the fire in this case was taken by the Defendant’s cigarette holder.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.