For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the part concerning the 2019 High Gohap 926 and 2020 High Gohap 234.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and 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 establishment of a crime of causing bodily injury or a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (or a violation of the said Act), unlawful investigation,

According to the records, while filing an appeal against the judgment of the first instance, the Defendant asserted misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as well as unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal, but at the second trial of the court below, the Defendant withdrawn misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the part of the case of 2020 high Gohap 10.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles as to the part concerning 2020 high 10 cases is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

According to Article 383 (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, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

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