According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and argued only mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the intention of murder and unreasonable sentencing for reasons of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to attempted suspension and excessive self-defense is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, it is just to determine that the court below guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to intentional murder or attempted murder by exceeding the bounds of the principle

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 sentencing of the

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