The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the court of first instance, the court below’s determination that the charges of this case were guilty on the grounds as stated in its reasoning is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below 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 principles as to Article 34

In addition, among the grounds of appeal, the facts charged of this case did not specify and infringed the defendant's right of defense.

The argument that a prosecution is unlawful is not legitimate as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant deemed it as the ground of appeal or that the court below was not subject to judgment ex officio.

Furthermore, even if examined ex officio, the facts charged in this case were sufficiently specified, thereby hindering the exercise of the defendant's right to defense.

No indictment may be deemed unlawful.

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