The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the court of first instance, the court below’s determination that the charges of this case were guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to intimidation of similar rape shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged by the defendant only to the court of final appeal that there was no ground for appeal or that the court below did not make ex officio decisions.

Meanwhile, 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

Other grounds of appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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