The judgment below

In light of the records, the court below's rejection of the defendant's assertion as to mental disability on the grounds as stated in its reasoning is just, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to mental disorder as alleged in the

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the ability to assume responsibility is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as the ground for appeal or as the subject of judgment ex officio.

In addition, the argument that the court below's decision on sentencing contains an error of law in incomplete deliberation on sentencing conditions is ultimately an argument of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment is unfair

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