The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where a crime cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed intention of the victim, withdrawal of the wish to punish may be made only before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered (Article 232(3) and (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If the wish to punish is withdrawn after the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered, such withdrawal shall not be effective.

Therefore, we cannot accept the allegation of the grounds of appeal purporting that the judgment of the court of first instance should be dismissed, since the victim's written request for punishment was submitted to the court below after rendering a judgment of the court of first instance.

B. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed on the ground that the judgment of the court below has affected the conclusion of the judgment, only in cases where a defendant has been sentenced to death penalty, imprisonment for life or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years.

Therefore, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the defendant's ground of appeal that leads to a violation of the principle of presumption of innocence and presumption of innocence is merely a dispute over the judgment of free judgment of the court of fact-finding or the judgment of choice and probative power of the court of fact-finding or the judgment of facts based on it.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in violation of the principle of absence of the company's duty is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged by the defendant only for the grounds of appeal that the court below did not consider it as the object of judgment ex officio.

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