The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have rejected the Defendant’s assertion of self-defense on the grounds of its stated reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal doctrine on self-defense.

In addition, the argument that the defendant did not confirm the defendant's desire for a participatory trial in the first instance court is erroneous, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as grounds for appeal or that the court below did not consider

Meanwhile, under 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, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate

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