According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as well as unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, but withdrawal of the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in such grounds for appeal on the first day of the original trial, and only left the grounds for appeal.

In such cases, an appeal shall not be filed with the Supreme Court on the ground of a new argument, such as erroneous determination of facts.

Meanwhile, according to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may be filed only where the court below rendered a sentence of death or imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less

Therefore, in this case where the defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the determination of punishment in the original judgment is unfair.

No appeal may also be filed with the Supreme Court on the grounds attributable to the intent of unfair sentencing, such as erroneous determination of facts as to the circumstances which serve as the conditions for sentencing.

In addition, since the change of court date is discretionary matters of the court, it cannot be said that there is no error of law in the procedure of the court below on the ground that the court below did not postpone the sentencing date as desired by

In addition, the argument that the Defendant’s name of the Defendant was erroneous in the lower judgment cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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