Winter fire accidents increase rapidly... There is only one difference between ‘true story’ and ‘arson’

Winter is a season when one small spark can easily spread into a large fire. The risk of indoor fires is especially high during this period when the use of heating appliances increases rapidly. In the case of an indoor fire, special caution is required as the worst outcome can be loss of life and it can also lead to criminal punishment and huge civil compensation claims.

The legal issue in fire accidents lies in the degree of intent and negligence. According to Article 164 of the Criminal Act (Arson of existing buildings), a person who intentionally sets fire to an existing building shall be punished by imprisonment for life or more than three years. On the other hand, the crime of accidentally starting a fire (Article 170 of the Criminal Act) is subject to a fine of less than 15 million won.

The problem arises in the ambiguous situation in between. Even if there was no definite intention, the court applies the crime of arson if “a fire was neglected while knowing that it could start.” Additionally, if a fire is caused by professional negligence or gross negligence (nearly intentional negligence), the person is subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine of up to 20 million won under Article 171 of the Criminal Act. In particular, if it is recognized as a misfire, not only is it subject to criminal punishment, but also liability for damages under Article 750 of the Civil Act cannot be reduced in compensation according to the special provisions of the Act on Liability for Misfire, and you may have to pay a huge amount of compensation. Therefore, it is most important to prove that it was not a ‘planned crime’ from the early stages of the investigation.

Attorney Kim Jong-seo of Daeryun Law Firm recently took charge of the case of Mr. A, a client who almost became an arsonist due to a moment of mistake. Mr. A was booked on charges of attempted arson of a Hyeonju building by lighting an eco-bag at his home on fire with a lighter while intoxicated. The police strongly insisted on indicting Mr. A, saying there was a ‘definite intention’ for arson based on the fact that he lit the fire himself using a lighter.

Accordingly, we devised a defense strategy based on objective evidence. First, the fact that Mr. A voluntarily called 119 immediately after lighting the fire, legally argued that this constitutes an attempted surrender and arrest under the law. In addition, he suffered mental pain due to the death of a family member, and medical records proved that he was mentally and physically weak at the time of the incident. In addition, photos from the scene proved that the fire only caused some scorching of the eco bag and wallpaper and did not pose a public risk. As a result, the prosecution issued a suspended indictment conditional on completion of recidivism prevention training, and the client was able to avoid the risk of becoming an ex-convict and maintain his life as a social worker.

Lawyer Kim Jong-seo of Daeryun Law Firm said, "There are many cases where statements unfavorable to oneself are poured out immediately after a fire because there is no situation, but even just one statement can greatly change the level of punishment and the outcome of compensation liability." He added, "You must obtain assistance from a lawyer from the early stage of the investigation before the fire identification results are released to prove that there was no intent and establish a response strategy to lower the degree of negligence to avoid the double whammy of criminal punishment and civil litigation."

[Global Epic CP Lee Soo-hwan / lsh@globalepic.co.kr]

[View full article]
Fire accidents increase rapidly in winter... There is only one difference between a ‘true story’ and an ‘arson’ (link)