The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Defendant (1) did not have committed a mistake of fact against the victim, and there was no intention to attack or threaten the victim.

(2) In light of the legal principles, the Defendant cannot be punished on the ground that the Defendant, by breaking the door of the first floor of the damaged house, only left the door door of the damaged house, and there was no danger of setting fire to the present building.

(3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of fact, the defendant's assertion against this can be sufficiently recognized, as it is stated in the judgment of the court below, since the defendant has contributed to or threatened the victim, and the defendant's assertion against this is without merit.

B. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, there is a "risk" under Article 27 of the Criminal Act in the act of the defendant putting the door, floor, wall, etc. before the house entrance as stated in the judgment of the court below.

As such, the defendant's argument against it is without merit.

C. Some favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant has no history of punishment heavier than the fine, etc., regarding the assertion on unfair sentencing, are more favorable than that of the defendant. However, in the trial of the party, the defendant denies the crime and does not entirely reflect his/her act while compelling him/her to make the legitimacy, and the nature of the crime and the criminal circumstances are very poor, such as assaulting or continuing intimidation victims, and even though the victim submitted the written complaint, it is difficult to regard the victim as not wanting to be punished, the written withdrawal of the complaint prepared by the victim does not necessarily mean that the defendant has agreed with the defendant, and only the defendant is avoiding an in