The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the facts charged in this case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, 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 misapprehending the relevant legal principles without exhausting all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, the lower court is justifiable to have rejected the Defendant’s assertion on mental and physical weakness on the grounds of its stated reasoning, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental and physical weakness as alleged in

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for

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