The judgment below

Although examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err 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 fraud, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, even in light of the records, there were errors in the lower court’s defense of the Defendant due to the infringement of the Defendant’s right to inspect trial records or the lower court’s examination of the victim B as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

subsection (b) of this section.

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for

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