The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the defendant appealed and asserted only unfair sentencing and mental and physical disability as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the service of the duplicate of the indictment, admissibility of evidence, and mistake of facts cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by rejecting the allegation regarding mental disorder based on its stated reasoning, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal

Furthermore, according to Article 232 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, cancellation of a complaint in an offense subject to victim's complaint can only be made before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered, so in the case where a complaint is revoked after the judgment of the court of first instance, such revocation shall not become effective, and thus, a judgment of dismissal of prosecution cannot be rendered

According to the records, the victim D submitted a written withdrawal of a complaint to the court of the original instance on June 19, 2015, which was after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered. Thus, the revocation of the complaint is not effective, and the grounds of appeal on this point cannot be accepted.

In addition, pursuant 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 more 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.