The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment that determined otherwise, and found the Defendant guilty of the injury resulting from robbery.

The ground of appeal that such a determination by the lower court is erroneous is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the evidence selection and probative value, which belong to the free judgment by the fact-finding court.

In addition, even when examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on injury by robbery or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

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 argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable

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