The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Of the grounds of appeal, the Defendant’s assertion that there was no intention to acquire money as stated in the facts charged of this case, and that the amount of damage does not reach the stated amount is ultimately the purport of disputing the fact-finding by the lower court.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

In light of the record, the judgment of the court below is not recognized as exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

Therefore, the above argument in the grounds of appeal is merely to criticize the matters falling under the exclusive right of the court below, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

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