Even upon examining records and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the legality of arrest of flagrant offenders or investigation procedures, etc., contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles on sentencing is ultimately unfair.

In that sense, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is unfair because it is too minor cannot be justified.

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