Defendants are not guilty.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the president of the H Improvement Center in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, and Defendant A is the employee in charge of night expenses and detailed duties at the H Improvement Center, and H Improvement Center was incorporated into the Yangcheon-gu I but the Defendants continued disputes with the removal company against redevelopment.

1. On September 26, 2016, the Defendant: (a) installed a pen in front of the door to remove the H Maintenance Center from the door of the H Maintenance Center around 09:00 on September 26, 2016; (b) caused the Defendant to commit a fire by advertising a fire to A, who is an employee of the H Maintenance Center, in order to drive away from the employees of the H Maintenance Center; and (c) speaking to A, “I,” with the large voice, “I, flick,” causing him to commit a crime of fire; and (d) flicked A, who was kept in custody to use the string in front of the door by spreading the width in front of the door to the end by attaching it to the P Maintenance Center (three meters in width and one meter in length).

2. Defendant A’s general goods fire prevention Defendant listened to B’s words “I flurine” from “I flurine,” at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) and caused public danger by setting it to the flur’s card in front of the front of the front door and attaching the flur to the flur’s card using the flurter, thereby causing public danger.

2. Determination

A. The term “public danger” under Article 167(1) of the Criminal Act, which provides for the crime of fire prevention against Defendant A, refers to a specific risk that infringes on the life, body, or property of an unspecified or large number of people. Whether such danger occurs or not ought to be objectively determined on the basis of specific circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12947, Jan. 14, 2010). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the health unit and this Court as to the instant case.