1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the principle of unfavorable and unfavorable nature in the lower judgment, since it merely reduced the content and degree of the assault stated in the facts charged and did not constitute the subject matter of a trial on

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed on the ground that the judgment of the court below has affected the conclusion of the judgment, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been pronounced.

Therefore, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the court below's decision on the selection and probative value of evidence of the court below or its finding of facts based on the facts established by the court below cannot be a legitimate appeal in its entirety. The court below's decision to the effect that the court below's decision on the selection of evidence of the court below or its finding of facts based on the facts different from the facts acknowledged by the court below is not a legitimate appeal.

3. The court's decision to adopt the application for examination of evidence may choose not to investigate the application when it deems it unnecessary at the court's discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3282, Oct. 10, 2003, etc.). Thus, the court below's failure to adopt the defendant's application for examination of evidence may not be deemed unlawful.

In addition, the court below did not perform the duty of explanation or violated the defendant's right of defense.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

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