On November 2, 2018, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment, which determined punishment on the premise that each of the instant crimes was in a single comprehensive crime, based on the premise that the instant crime was committed on November 2, 2018 among the instant charges.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment and number of crimes committed.

In addition, the lower judgment erred by misapprehending the legal principles or mistake of facts as to the remainder of the charges except for the crime on November 2, 2018 among the facts charged in the instant case.

The assertion that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the possibility of expectation of lawful acts is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it asserts that the Defendant’s ground for appeal is either the Defendant’s ground for appeal, or the lower court did not have decided ex officio.

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