The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the facts charged against the Defendant was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning and rejected the allegation on mental and physical weakness.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence by violating logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the injury of both physical and mental weakness and robbery.

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to aggravated repeated crimes is not a legitimate ground for appeal, since the defendant's ground for appeal or the court below did not consider it as an object of judgment ex officio.

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