If the appellate court reverses and renders a judgment of the first instance on the grounds that are not included in the grounds for appeal, it shall be deemed that the grounds for appeal by the appellant are determined in the process of determining the punishment, and it shall not be deemed that the appellate court omitted the judgment on the legitimacy of the grounds for appeal, on the ground that it did not specify

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3035 Decided June 29, 2007). According to the records, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance ex officio on the grounds of a consolidated hearing decision, etc. and determined the sentence against the defendant following pleadings.

Therefore, the lower court did not separately decide on the Defendant’s grounds for appeal of unfair sentencing, and did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the grounds for appeal and by omitting judgment thereon.

In addition, the argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing contains an error of incomplete deliberation on basic facts for sentencing is ultimately an argument of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

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