The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged (excluding the part concerning innocence in the grounds of appeal) was guilty, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on assault or intimidation in

In addition, the argument that the lower court erred by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance between crimes and the principle of responsibility is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 not less 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 sentencing of the punishment

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