Examining the circumstances revealed in the records, such as the background leading up to the instant crime, method of crime, the defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability at the time of the instant crime. Accordingly, the allegation in the grounds of appeal on this point

In addition, in light of the content and degree of the defense activities of the public defender in the original trial, the argument in the grounds of appeal that the public defender in the original trial failed to properly support the public defender cannot be accepted.

In addition, there is an error of mistake in the judgment of the court below

The argument that there is a violation of the law in the proceedings of the first instance shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is asserted in the final appeal that the court below did not consider it as the ground for appeal or that it did not consider it as the subject of ex officio.

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 punishment is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable 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.