1. On the grounds stated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant and the requester for probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s assertion on mental and physical disability as to the prosecuted case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in incomplete deliberation on the grounds for sentencing is ultimately an argument of unfair sentencing.

However, according 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 not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

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

2. As long as a defendant files an appeal against a prosecuted case regarding a request for probation order, the request for probation order shall be deemed to have been appealed.

However, there is no indication of the reason in the petition of appeal and there is no ground for appeal on this part.

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