The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The Defendant’s argument in the grounds of appeal is that the lower court erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and thereby convicted the Defendant, despite the absence of excessive possession and assault of the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case. The lower court’s judgment is unlawful.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

Even if examining the reasoning in light of the record, it is difficult to find out any error beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the above ground of appeal cannot be accepted merely because it criticizes the matters falling under the exclusive right of the court below.

Upon examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, it is just for the court below to reject the defendant's assertion on mental disorder, and there is an error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to mental disorder as alleged in the grounds of

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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