Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the facts charged in the instant case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

There is no illegality of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or of misunderstanding the statutes or legal principles pertaining to litigation procedures.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred by infringing on the nature of the principle of balanced criminal punishment or the principle of responsibility in sentencing constitutes the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is 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.