The principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration provides that no more severe punishment than that of the judgment of the court below shall be imposed on the case on which the defendant appealed and the case on which the defendant appealed on behalf of the defendant, and that the court below sentenced a more severe punishment than that of the court of first instance by accepting the reasons for appeal by the public prosecutor in the instant case appealed on the ground that only the public prosecutor’s punishment is too unfeasible

No violation of the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration shall be deemed to be violated.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 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 is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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