The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. on February 4, 2015 among the facts charged modified on February 4, 2015 was justifiable and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the amendment of indictment.

In addition, the argument that there was a mistake or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the calculation of the amount of additional collection in the judgment of the court below among the grounds for appeal, is alleged by the defendant as the grounds for appeal or as not subject to an ex officio determination by the court below, and is not a legitimate ground for appeal, and the record does not contain errors as alleged in the reasoning of the appeal, even

Meanwhile, the argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing erred by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance of crimes or the principle of responsibility constitutes an unfair argument in sentencing.

Therefore, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.

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