Examining the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the court below was justified in finding the defendant guilty of coercion among the modified facts charged of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or of misunderstanding the requirements and procedures for modification of indictment, abuse of authority to prosecute, and coercion.

In addition, the argument that the lower court erred by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance between crimes and the principle of responsibility is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

Accordingly, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only when a sentence of death or imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years is pronounced.

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair 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.