The argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the basic facts of sentencing and by violating the logical rules constitutes the allegation 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 on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

The Defendant stated in the sign of the appellate brief that “the lower court violated the Constitution, laws, orders, and rules, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment,” and did not state specific grounds therefor. Therefore, it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, according to the records, the court below cannot be deemed to have violated jurisdiction over the trial procedure or the defendant's right to defense, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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