The argument that the lower court erred in incomplete deliberation on normal relations and in mistake of facts constitutes the allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unreasonable, including

In addition, Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act that limits the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is included in the territory of the freedom of formation permitted by the legislative authority, and thus, the provision of the above Act is not in violation of the Constitution that regulates the right of the people to be tried by the Supreme Court (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1808, Apr. 26, 2007). Thus, the allegation in the grounds for appeal that the above

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