The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment, the court below was just in rejecting the Defendant’s defense and finding the Defendant guilty of the charges of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on self-defense

In addition, the argument about mental disorder in the grounds of appeal is not legitimate grounds of appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as grounds of appeal or that the court below did not consider it as

Furthermore, even if examined, the defendant does not seem to have been in a mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime.

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, the argument that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not 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.