Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by omitting judgment

On the other hand, the issue of whether to resume the arguments adopted or closed as evidence is the matter belonging to the court's discretion. Therefore, even if the court below rejected the application of the counsel for resumption of the arguments after the closing of argument, it is erroneous in the court below's litigation procedure against the defendant's right

shall not be subject to an appeal.

In addition, the argument that the lower court did not consider the grounds for sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing. However, under Article 383 Subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against 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.

Justices Kim Chang-suk

Justices Park Sang-ok