The judgment below

Although examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or omitting necessary judgments, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the violation of Article 21(4) of the former Act on the Establishment of Residential and Residential Environments (amended by Act No. 13508, Sept. 1, 2015), contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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