The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the court below is justified in finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine without exhausting all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below, while failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations in the determination of the punishment against the defendant, found facts in violation of the rules of evidence and sentenced an excessive sentence by deviating from the inherent limits of sentencing discretion is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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