The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the provision of Article 232 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, a complaint may be withdrawn before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered. Thus, if the complainant was cancelled at the time of the appellate trial, it has no effect as cancellation of complaint against a complaint subject to victim'

According to the records, the victims can know the fact that they cancel their complaint against the defendant after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered. Thus, the cancellation of complaint by the victims after the judgment of the court of first instance has no effect as cancellation of complaint against a crime subject to prosecution on complaint

Therefore, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity of revocation of complaint.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only a case on which 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 permitted. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

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