The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Although examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to deception in fraud, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, in so determining, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, by taking fraud in the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), by misapprehending the intent to obtain unjust enrichment in the crime of violation

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence, mistake of facts, or misapprehension of the legal principles without examining the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

Therefore, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.

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