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

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 27, 2016, around 21:30 on September 27, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 21:30, the Defendant: (b) in the process of having a dispute with the victim D, who is her husband, and (c) in the process of keeping the clothing, etc. of approximately one square size; (b) attached the KON to the KON; and (c) attached it to all other clothes and clothes kept therein.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed the above lending scheme used by the victim and his family members as a residence by making it impossible to repair it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement in the police statement protocol against E;

1. Application of statutes on images of on-site photographs;

1. Article 164 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 164 of the choice of punishment (Optional to Imprisonment with labor for a period of time);

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment for one year and six months to fifteen years; and

2. Scope of recommended punishments based on the sentencing guidelines: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months from six months to three years.

3. Determination of sentence: One year and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution are crimes of this case committed by the defendant with her husband and telephone, and thus, the defendant was unsatisfed in the clothes of the defendant, part of the apartment house, due to the reason that the defendant had a dispute with her husband with her husband, and such acts are very dangerous and potential to cause serious harm to human life or property due to the fire-prevention of the present building.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and was in depth divided, that the defendant attempted to extinguish early and filed a report in 119, and that the defendant did not have a large amount of force to punish the defendant, the defendant should not be sentenced to punishment, taking into account the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment, etc. In addition, the conditions of all the sentencing as shown in the arguments of this case, such as character and conduct, environment, social relationship, background of the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be comprehensively considered, and the punishment shall be determined as per the order.