The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant charges on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the issue of whether to adopt the application for examination of evidence may not be examined when the court deems it unnecessary at the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 2011). Thus, even if the court below rejected the defendant's application for witness, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

On the other hand, the argument that the court below erred in imposing a sentence favorable to the defendant constitutes an 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 on the defendant, the argument that the 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.