The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the facts charged in this case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

As alleged in the grounds of appeal, 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 relation between the injury, assault and injury in the crime of robbery, and the elements for establishing the crime of quasi-Robbery, etc.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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