The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the court below is just in finding the Defendant guilty of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. due to the delivery of Handphones on May 10, 2016 and May 20, 2016 among the facts charged in the instant case, and violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. due to the sale, receipt, smoking, and giving and receiving of marijuana related to I related to I, and violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. due to giving and receiving marijuana related to AD, on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the rules on the reinforcement of confession, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by misapprehending the legal principles on the rules on the reinforcement of confession, or by exceeding the bounds

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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