Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court of first instance, it is justifiable to find the court below guilty on March 18, 2009 among the charged facts of this case, on March 22, 2009, violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapons, etc.) on April 1, 2009, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapons, etc.), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapons, etc.), intimidation on April 20, 2009, and rape on June 10, 2009. < Amended by Act No. 9574, Apr. 20, 2009; Act No. 9547, Apr. 20, 2009>

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the relevant legal principles.

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is permitted only when the court below rendered a death penalty, an indefinite term, or an imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years. Thus, in this case where the defendant was sentenced to a minor punishment, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence is unfair

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