The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the defendant asserted that there was a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles in the statement of grounds of appeal along with the assertion of unfair sentencing, and did not clearly withdraw the assertion on the date of the original trial, the court below held that the defendant's grounds of appeal only deemed the defendant's grounds of appeal to be unfair sentencing, and did not render any judgment

However, according to the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the law of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal principles on fraud, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal. Therefore, the omission of judgment as above does not affect the conclusion of the judgment

Meanwhile, the argument that the judgment below erred in the deliberation of sentencing and the determination of sentencing that infringe on the essential contents of the principle of responsibility is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument.

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

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