The assertion that the lower judgment erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles on circumstances affecting the sentencing, is ultimately attributable to the purport of unfair sentencing.

However, examining various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the determination of the lower court’s punishment, which maintained the first instance court sentenced to 14 years of imprisonment with prison labor, cannot be deemed to be extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the public defender.

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