According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and argued mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as well as unreasonable sentencing as the grounds for appeal, but on the first trial of the court below, the defendant and his defense counsel appealed to the appeal of this case only on the grounds of bilateral unjustness, and the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are withdrawn.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the effect of withdrawal of the grounds of appeal is not acceptable in this case where there is no evidence to see that such written protocol of trial is a clear clerical error.

Therefore, the argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, 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.

On the other hand, a written judgment is signed and sealed by the judge (Article 41 of the Criminal Procedure Act), but it is not necessary to affix the signature and seal of the judge to the copy of the judgment

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3060 Decided June 28, 2007, etc.). Therefore, we cannot accept the allegation in the grounds of appeal that the first instance court and the lower judgment omitted the judge’s signature and seal on a different premise.

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