The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the court of first instance, the court below’s finding the Defendant guilty of the Defendant’s fraud among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the law of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal principles on fraud, without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

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

Among the grounds of appeal, the argument that the amount of fraud against victim I is not correct is not a legitimate ground of appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the court below did not consider it as the grounds of appeal or that it did not consider it as the subject of judgment ex officio.

In addition, the issue of adopting the application for examination of evidence may not be examined when the court deems it unnecessary at the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 201). Thus, even if the court below rejected the defendant's application for examination of evidence, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

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