A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 6, 2015, at around 21:12, the Defendant, at the residence of the Defendant located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the ground problem, and brought about 1 gasoline ( approximately 5 liter, No. 1), which was kept in custody in a warehouse for the purpose of putting fire in the above residence, to the inside of the warehouse for the purpose of putting fire in the residence, and then string one rab (No. 2) from the west, which was inside the inner bank to put fire into fire in the gasoline, and string the fire to the structures that people use as their residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Protocols of seizure, list of seizure and report on investigation;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on photograph description;

1. The main sentence of Article 175 of the Criminal Act and Article 164 (1) of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act is highly likely to be committed in light of the fact that the defendant prepared a fire prevention in his/her mother and his/her residential place where he/she reside, and that the defendant has a great risk.

There are records of crimes that have been sentenced to punishment, such as punishment, for multiple types of crimes.

On the other hand, on the other hand, the defendant's perception of committing the crime of this case and his mistake is divided.

There are circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances such as the defendant's her mother's disputes over the ground and leading up to the crime.

In light of the Defendant’s words and actions seen before and after the instant crime, it seems that the Defendant had relatively weak intent to move fire prevention.

There was no criminal history that the defendant was punished for the same crime.

In light of the overall sentencing conditions, etc. revealed in the trial process of this case, it is right to postpone the execution of imprisonment on condition that the defendant observe the protection and observation only once, rather than the sentence imposed by the defendant, taking into account the aforementioned conditions disadvantageous to or favorable to the defendant.

like the order of the report.