The lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found all of the facts charged of this case guilty.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 the forgery and use of private documents, fabrication and use thereof, and fabrication and use of securities, etc., as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the lower court’s judgment did not recognize mental or physical loss or mental weakness is erroneous, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal as it did not serve as the grounds for appeal. In addition, examining various circumstances, such as the background of each of the instant crimes, method of crime, Defendant’s act before and after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and the mental condition of the Defendant, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness at the time of each

shall not be deemed to exist.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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