The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

In addition, examining the records, it is not recognized that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of the crime of this case.

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding “hazardous goods” in the special injury crime, or by omitting judgment on mental and physical disorder, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

Meanwhile, 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 more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed

Considering the Defendant’s argument of unfair sentencing as an assertion of unfair sentencing, the argument that the sentencing of a sentence is unfair is not legitimate in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the Defendant.

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