For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty of the order) among the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity of a single comprehensive crime and final judgment, abuse of public prosecution right, embezzlement in embezzlement and intent to obtain unjust enrichment, intentional intent in crime of fraud, fraud in fraud, disposal of property, pecuniary gain, and calculation of the amount of fraud, or by omitting judgment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of

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 labor for more 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 defendant’s punishment is unreasonable is too unreasonable

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