The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the charge was established on the ground of its stated reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the logical and empirical rules and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Meanwhile, in the appellate brief for Defendant’s submission, the part that “the court below violated the Constitution, laws, orders, and rules, or erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment,” is merely stated in such assertion, and did not state specific reasons therefor. Thus, it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, pursuant to 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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