According to 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 sentencing of the punishment

In addition, Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act limiting the grounds of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is included in the territory of the freedom of formation permitted to legislative authority. Thus, the above provision violates the constitutional provisions under Article 101(2) of the Constitution or the right of citizens to a trial of the Supreme Court, and it cannot be deemed unconstitutional provisions under which fundamental rights are infringed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1808, Apr. 26, 2007). Thus, the ground of appeal that the above provision

In addition, even if the first instance court’s separate judgments were rendered against the defendant and the second instance court’s two cases were combined, each of the first instance court’s punishment is unlawful, since it does not constitute a single sentence, in cases where the first instance court’s punishment is imprisonment with prison labor and a fine, and the appellate court maintains imprisonment with prison labor and a fine as it is sentenced by the first instance court, and thus, the defendant

Therefore, we cannot accept the allegation in the grounds of appeal on a different premise.

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