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 in the misapprehension of legal principles as to collection does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal.

In addition, since the issue of whether to postpone the sentencing date or whether to accept the application for examination of evidence belongs to the discretion of the court, the fact inquiry application and the request for postponement of the sentencing date to prove the defendant's cooperation in the investigation after the closing of argument were filed, the court below, without accepting the request, sentenced

Thus, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

Meanwhile, the argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law in incomplete deliberation on the conditions of sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

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 argument that the sentencing of the punishment is unfair

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