For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court found the victim E guilty of fraud among the facts charged in this case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles, such as co-principal, direct psychological principle, and evidence trial principle, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, under 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed

In this case where a more minor sentence was imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence was judged in violation of the rules of evidence and the rule of experience, is unfair, and thus, it 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.