According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and only asserted that he was in a state of mental or physical disability in relation to the unreasonable sentencing and some facts charged as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the commencement of commission of the attempted larceny of part of night buildings is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even if the record is examined, there is no illegality such as the assertion by the state appointed defense counsel.

In addition, in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below's rejection of the defendant's assertion on mental and physical disability for reasons as stated in its reasoning is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

On the other hand, even after examining the record, there is no illegality as alleged by the defendant in the investigation process of this case.

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