The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is just in finding that the charge of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) among the facts charged in this case and occupational embezzlement on November 11, 2009 is not related to the crime of summary order established and the crime of comprehensive crimes, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle as to comprehensive crimes, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred in infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance of crime or the principle of responsibility in sentencing against the defendant is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument.

However, under 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 not less 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 sentencing of the

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