The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of mistake in the judgment of the court below shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below exceeded the limit of discretion in sentencing constitutes the argument 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, the above assertion is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed

In addition, whether to reduce or exempt punishment for concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act can be determined by the court which judged the relevant crime at its discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8376, Sept. 11, 2008). The court below's decision that determined punishment within the applicable range of punishment for latter concurrent crimes in consideration of equity and cases where the judgment is judged simultaneously with the crime of fraud for which judgment became final and conclusive with respect to the crime of this case in which latter concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on interpretation and application of Article 39

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