1. The prosecutor lower court reversed the judgment of the first instance court that did not recognize the fact at the time of the Defendant’s each of the instant crimes, and mitigated the Defendant from a mental disability.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on

2. Examining various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age and happiness environment, relationship with victims, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and circumstances after the crime, as indicated in the Defendant’s records, the sentencing of the lower court that sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment for life is extremely unfair, even if considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

The Defendant stated in the sign of the appellate brief that “the Defendant was in violation of the Constitution, laws, orders, or rules, or there is an error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the legal principles,” and that “the instant crime committed by the Defendant was committed in the state of mental or physical disability or the state of mental or physical disability (e.g., the state of mental or physical disorder)” and did not state specific reasons therefor. Therefore, this assertion

3. The final appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.