The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that all of the modified charges of this case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts beyond the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on house intrusion, property damage, double indictment or universal offense.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court is just to have rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the mental and physical weakness on the grounds of its stated reasoning, and there is no error as alleged

Meanwhile, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

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

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