The defendant's argument in the grounds of appeal is that the court below found the defendant guilty by finding wrong facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles despite the fact that the defendant had no intention to commit fraud, which is unlawful.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

In light of the record, even if the reasoning of the judgment of the court below was examined, it cannot be found that the judgment exceeded the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, and there is no illegality of misunderstanding the legal principles as to the criminal intent to obtain fraud in a crime of fraud, contrary

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below violated Article 51 of the Criminal Act concerning the conditions of sentencing is the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may be filed only where a death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for at least ten years is pronounced.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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