According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

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

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, and the judgment of the court below has affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence was imposed against the defendant, the court below's fact-finding, which belongs to the judgment of the court of fact-finding, is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, 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 amount of punishment is unreasonable

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