1. On the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged against Defendant A on September 27, 2012, and sentenced Defendant A three years of imprisonment on March 5, 2013 and dealt with concurrent crimes under the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act and the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. On August 10, 2017, the lower court determined that the relationship between the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established with respect to the special intimidation for which the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 9, 2018.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on latter concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

2. The argument that the lower court’s judgment on Defendant C’s grounds of appeal deviates from sentencing discretion and violates Article 51 of the Criminal Act constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, according to 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

Defendant

In this case where a minor sentence is imposed against C, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. According to the records on Defendant E’s grounds of appeal, Defendant E appealed on the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted unfair sentencing as the grounds of 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.

As seen above, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed.

Defendant

E. A more minor sentence is imposed against E.