beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of the injury by robbery among the facts charged in the instant case, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.), and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, etc.). In so doing, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules,
Furthermore, as long as it is found guilty of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case, we cannot accept the allegation that the judgment dismissing the prosecution should be rendered, since the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant on the premise that the above crime is not recognized and only the assault crime included therein is recognized.
Meanwhile, examining the circumstances revealed in the records, such as the background leading up to each of the crimes in this case, the method of crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is recognized that the defendant was not in the state of mental disorder at the time of each of the crimes in this case. Therefore, the lower court did not err
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 permitted. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.