The argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law by misunderstanding the facts on the premise of sentencing and violating the rules of law is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, examining various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the record, such as the Defendant’s age character and character environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, etc., even if considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal, it cannot be said that the lower court’s sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years is extremely unfair.

In addition, according to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance and argued only unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in violation of the rules of evidence in relation to accomplice relation 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.