The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have convicted the victim L of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case as stated in its reasoning, preparing false official documents related to the purchase and food service, and holding false official documents on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intentional fraud or falsity in the preparation of false official document.

Meanwhile, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the method of sentencing review and sentencing determination is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against the defendant, the assertion that the amount of punishment is unfair shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

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