The judgment below

In light of the records, the court below's rejection of the defendant's argument about mental and physical weakness on the grounds as stated in its reasoning is acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to mental and physical weakness.

In addition, since the extension of the notice date falls under the court's discretion, the court below rendered a judgment without accepting the request for postponement of the notice date for agreement with the victim.

There is a violation of law that infringes on the defendant's right to fair trial and defense.

subsection (b) of this section.

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for final appeal, and the argument that the Defendant’s treatment and custody should be granted does not constitute legitimate grounds for final appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal

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