The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that found the Defendant guilty of violation of the Narcotics Control Act among the facts charged in the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 the exclusion of illegally collected evidence.

The argument that the judgment of the court of first instance contains an error of misunderstanding the legal principles as to abuse of public prosecution power or a violation of law without changing the sentencing date is asserted only when the defendant alleged as grounds for appeal, or when the court below did not consider it as being subject to judgment ex officio, and this is also not a legitimate ground for appeal.

The argument that there is an error in violation of the rules of evidence in the sentencing of the court below is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too 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.