For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant on the part of the facts charged of the instant case on the grounds that there is no proof of crime, and rendered a not guilty on the grounds thereof, and convicted the Defendant of the bodily injury without any amendment process

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on changes in indictment

The argument that the procedure for the arrest of flagrant offenders is unlawful is a legitimate ground for appeal, which is asserted only when the defendant took it as the ground for appeal or the court below did not take it as the object of judgment ex officio.

The argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of incomplete deliberation on the conditions of sentencing constitutes the allegation of unfair sentencing.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable cannot be 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.