The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment that determined that the Defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not seem to have had the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and rejected the Defendant’s assertion in the grounds of appeal as to mental and physical disability.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal judgment or exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, even if the grounds alleged in the grounds of appeal are considered.

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 above argument that the sentencing of the court below

Other grounds of appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. As long as a defendant files an appeal against a prosecuted case regarding a request for probation order, it shall be deemed that an appeal has been filed regarding a request for probation order.

However, there is no entry of reasons in the petition of appeal or there is no entry of reasons for objection in the petition of appeal.

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