The argument that the judgment below erred by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance of punishment in the method of examining the sentencing and determining the sentencing is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, examining the following circumstances: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, there are significant grounds to recognize that the lower court’s sentencing, which maintained the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to 20 years of imprisonment, was extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted by the national defense counsel.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.