Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, it is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted of larceny among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

There is no violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

In addition, the court below's rejection of the defendant's claim on mental and physical disability based on the circumstances as stated in its reasoning is justified.

There is no error of law in misunderstanding the legal principles concerning mental disability.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only when a death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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