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, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair does not

B. With respect to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the Constitution does not have any provision except the provisions of Article 107(2). Since the matters concerning the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court other than the above provisions can be prescribed by the enemy, the issue of how to allow an appeal for any reason in a criminal case is a matter of legislative policy, and the provisions of Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which limit the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, shall be deemed to belong to the territory of the freedom of formation permitted by the legislative authority. Thus, the provision of the above Act is not in violation of Article 101(2) of the Constitution, Article 101(2) of the Constitution, Article 97Do1355 of the Constitution, and Article 207Do1808 of April 26, 2007, or Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which limits the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, or is unconstitutional in violation of the principle of equality (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do1383.

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