The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is just in finding the defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic among the facts charged against the defendant. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts beyond the bounds of the free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, according to the above evidence, it is just that the court below deemed the goods as provided in the above crime and confiscated them from the defendant, and there is no error of violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles on confiscation as alleged in

In addition, 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 more 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.

On the other hand, the issue of whether the closure or closure of pleadings belongs to the court's discretion, and thus, the court below's rejection of the defendant's application for resumption of pleadings after the closure of pleadings cannot 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.