According to the records, the Defendant asserted a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to intention in the statement of grounds of appeal, and even if the Defendant stated the above grounds of appeal on the first day of the original trial and did not clearly withdraw the above assertion, the lower court, on the sole ground that the Defendant’s grounds of appeal was the allegation of unreasonable sentencing, may be seen as not

However, in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles, and thus, the omission of judgment by the lower court does not affect the conclusion of the judgment.

According to 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment 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.