The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the facts charged of this case, considering the summary of the grounds for appeal.

① The article on the poppy in the shape of “a” did not discover that the Defendant opened a paint at the instant site.

② D stated that there is no page access to the site, while E made a statement that there was a page access, it stated that there was no page access, but two defendants set fire, but it was more garbage than the floor of the building that is not a page access.

③ The purport of the Defendant’s statement that D’s act of cutting the floor with a wooden machine did not seem to be an attempt to extinguish fire.

④ The Defendant acknowledged that the Defendant was not paid wages at the scene of fire and at the police station.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the facts charged in this case cannot be deemed as proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt solely on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, on the ground that the Defendant asserted that “the Defendant did not have any fire on the floor with a stop, did not put any other parts of the usual part of the people in order to avoid drilling, and only put a stop on the empty part, which was left by the reason that the Defendant could not know the place.” In so doing, the lower court determined that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt solely on the basis of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

① The witness D and E of the lower court did not witness the situation after the fire and did not witness the first outbreak situation.

② According to E’s testimony, it is recognized that there was an entertainment interview with the site at the time.

In view of field photo CDs and field photographs, the page page that the Defendant was in fire was immediately adjacent to the point of origin.

③ According to D’s testimony, D went to the point of origin.