Conviction for attempted aggravated arson and dangerous bodily harm in legal concurrence

The Federal Court of Justice dismissed the defendant's appeal as unfounded, upholding the conviction while correcting the legal classification for one count to attempted aggravated arson in legal concurrence with 22 cases of dangerous bodily harm and 22 cases of attempted dangerous bodily harm, with the defendant bearing the costs of the legal remedy. The dispute involved a review of a lower court's criminal judgment, where the prosecution requested a specific adjustment to the sentencing grounds for a series of violent and incendiary offenses committed concurrently. The decisive legal basis lay in the doctrine of legal concurrence (Tateinheit) and the statutory requirements for classifying attempted aggravated arson and dangerous bodily harm, which the appellate court applied to align the judgment with the prosecutor's motion without altering the substantive outcome of the conviction.