In a case where only the prosecutor only appealed the judgment of the first instance on the ground of unfair sentencing and the defendant did not appeal, the defendant cannot appeal the judgment of the first instance on the ground of a misapprehension of legal principles as to the appellate judgment.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do579 Decided May 28, 2009). According to the records, only the prosecutor appealed on the grounds of unfair sentencing against the conviction of the first instance court, and the defendant did not appeal. The court below accepted the prosecutor's appeal and rendered a sentence heavier than the first instance court against the defendant. Thus, the court below's assertion that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the suspension and completion of statute of limitations cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the grounds alleged in the grounds of appeal by the defendant are that the judgment of the court below is unreasonable, as they are alleged in the grounds of appeal by pointing out various circumstances regarding the determination of punishment.

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 above assertion to the effect that the sentencing of punishment

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