The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of the injury resulting from rape among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there was no error of violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules.

On the other hand, prosecution against rape injury constitutes double prosecution.

The assertion that it constitutes abuse of the right to institute a public prosecution does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal as it is asserted by the defendant only when it comes to the final appeal that there was no ground for appeal or that the court below did not consider it as being subject to ex officio.

Furthermore, even if examining ex officio, the lower court did not err as otherwise alleged.

In addition, pursuant 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 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 sentencing of the

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