The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court and the first instance court, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of rape, attempted rape, and special intimidation among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in the violation of the principle of balance of punishment, the principle of responsibility, the principle of equality, and the limitation of discretion of sentencing due to the lack of deliberation on the defendant's circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing, is ultimately an unfair argument

Therefore, under 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been 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.