The argument in the grounds of appeal that the state appointed defense counsel was not properly assisted in the trial proceedings of the court below shall not be accepted in light of the contents and degree of the defense activities conducted by the state appointed defense counsel in the court below.

Meanwhile, the argument that the lower court erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the conditions of sentencing, and by violating the principle of balanced sentencing or the principle of accountability as to the determination of sentencing is ultimately an assertion of unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 Subparag. 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 is allowed. As such, the argument that the determination of punishment is unreasonable is not

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