The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

A seized Raz(s) (No. 1) shall be flazed.

1. The part of the defendant case

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) In relation to the attempted crime of fire prevention of the present main building, the Defendant and the person in charge of the medical care and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”) committed an intentional fire to the present main building.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In other words, in light of the fact that the defendant's physical and mental weakness flown with the judgment power, the defendant seems to have avoided the abortions, etc. around the victim E's house by applying it to the flusium and was in the management of the oil so that the flusium does not spread, the size of the fire occurred before the victim's house, the quantity of the flusium, etc. specified as a intermediary, and the materials that are not easily attached to the victim's gate and the location of the victim's gate, etc., the defendant was willing to allow the defendant to attach a flusium to the victim's house.

It is difficult to see it.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. On November 21, 2015, the summary of the facts charged regarding attempted fire prevention of the present residential building was found to have been collected from the victim E’s housing gate in Seocho-si around 21:00 on November 21, 2015, and added a flusium in the vicinity of the victim E’s house gate, but the victim was found to have been in an attempted crime by immediately extinguishing the flusium in the house.

2) The lower court determined as follows: (a) the Defendant was aware at the time that he had an awareness of the possibility of destroying another’s house, which is a residence of another person, due to his act; (b) and (c) there was an internal intent to

For the reason that it is reasonable to see that the defendant can have the intention to prevent the present building and fire.

In view of the fact that the court found guilty.

3) The subjective element of the elements of the relevant legal doctrine that is the subject element of the constituent elements of the relevant legal doctrine refers to the case where the possibility of occurrence of the crime is expressed as uncertain and thus it is acceptable, and dolusently.