According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and asserted only mental health and injury as the grounds for appeal along with unreasonable sentencing.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its holding, and there is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of the logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.

Upon examining the records, the court below is just in rejecting the defendant's assertion on mental and physical disability based on its stated reasoning, and there is no error of law as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, under 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 not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment

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