In light of various circumstances indicated in the record, such as the circumstance leading up to each crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after each crime, and the fact that the defendant repeatedly committed several offenses under the same law, it is difficult to view that the defendant at the time of each of the crimes of this case had the ability to discern things or make decisions, and therefore, it is justifiable to recognize the defendant as having a weak state of mental disability. In addition, the court below did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the state of mental disability of the defendant,

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not consider the defendant as a condition for sentencing favorable to the defendant without a reasonable ground is ultimately an assertion of unfair sentencing. 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 is imposed, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. As such, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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