According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and asserted facts and misapprehension of legal principles as well as mental disorder and unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, but withdrawn the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in the first trial of the court below

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even after ex officio examination of the facts revealed by the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, it is difficult to view that the Defendant had a mental and physical state at the time of committing the instant crime, in full view of the following: (a) the background and method of committing the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime

Meanwhile, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, may be appealed on the ground that the amount of punishment is extremely unreasonable. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground

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