The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on “Habitual Assault” and confiscation in the crime of

In addition, 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. Thus, there is an error of omission of discretionary mitigation in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed

The argument that 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.