The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence and exceeding the bounds of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the criminal intent of

In addition, considering the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below is just in rejecting the defendant's assertion on mental and physical disability, and there is no violation of law that does not recognize mental and physical disability.

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred by infringing on the principle of balance of crime and the principle of responsibility in determining punishment, thereby deviating from the limitation of sentencing discretion, constitutes the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may only be filed where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is sentenced. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a

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