According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, according to Article 383 (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, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

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

On the other hand, the argument that the state-owned counsel was not properly assisted in the first instance trial is not a legitimate ground for appeal, since the defendant alleged that it was the ground for appeal, or that it was not subject to the judgment by the court below ex officio.

In light of the content and degree of the defense activity of the national defense counsel in the court below as shown in the record, the ground of appeal to the purport that the national defense counsel was not properly assisted in the court below's trial cannot be accepted.

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