The argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the empirical rule and legal doctrine on sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, the argument that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the issue of whether to allow an appeal for any reason in a criminal case is not only the issue of legislative policy, but also the provision of Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act that limits the grounds of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing belongs to the territory of the freedom of formation permitted to the legislative authority. Thus, it cannot be said that the provision of the above Act is in violation of Article 101 (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea or the provision

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2001Do6138 Decided February 20, 2003, etc.). Accordingly, we cannot accept the allegation that Article 383 Subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act is unconstitutional.

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