The argument that the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the deliberation of sentencing and the method of determining sentencing in violation of the rules of evidence is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, examining various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the determination of the lower court’s imprisonment with prison labor for a period of 20 years cannot be deemed extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, the argument that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing each of the crimes in this case is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as a ground for appeal or that the court below did

Furthermore, even after ex officio examination of the circumstances of each of the instant crimes, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of each of the instant crimes, in view of the background of each of the instant crimes, the method of commission of crimes, the situation

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