In light of the circumstances revealed in the records, such as the background leading up to the instant crime, the behavior of the Defendant at the time of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the judgment of the first instance court which did not recognize mental and physical disorder and the judgment of the court below which maintained the conclusion thereof, did not err by misapprehending the conclusion of the judgment,

In addition, pursuant 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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