Examining the various circumstances indicated in the records, such as the background leading up to each of the crimes in this case, the method of crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, it is difficult to view that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of each of the crimes in this case, and therefore, there is no illegality of not recognizing

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by deviating from the inherent limit of sentencing discretion is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment

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