마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
The appeal is dismissed.
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
The issue of adopting the application for examination of evidence may not be examined when the court deems it unnecessary at the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 2011). Thus, even if the court below rejected the Defendant’s application for witness, it cannot be deemed unlawful.
The Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance court, and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court did not ex officio consider the matters alleged in the grounds for appeal.
In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred in mistake is not a legitimate ground of appeal.
The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s sentence is excessive, and that limiting the cases where Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act may serve as the ground of appeal on unreasonable sentencing violates the Constitution that provides for the citizen’s right to trial and equality.
However, Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act that limits the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing cannot be deemed as unconstitutional provisions that violate the Constitution or violate the principle of equality, which regulates the rights of citizens to be tried by the Supreme Court or Article 101(2) of the Constitution.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1808, Apr. 26, 2007). Therefore, the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is merely an argument that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
In addition, the lower judgment’s assertion that there was an error of misconception of facts in the incomplete deliberation on basic facts for sentencing constitutes an unreasonable sentencing argument.
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 may be filed on the ground
Therefore, in this case where the defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the above.