According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment below is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred by violating the principle of balanced criminal punishment and the principle of responsibility in imposing the defendant's sentencing, and that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the methods of examining and determining the sentencing is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may only be filed where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable cannot be

In addition, the argument that the sentencing date should be delayed does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal as provided by Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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