beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment convicting Defendant C on the ground that there was no proof of a crime regarding the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. by delivery of Mepta (hereinafter “Handphone”) among the facts charged against Defendant C, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty.
The judgment below
Examining the record in light of the reasoning, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, the lower court convicted Defendant A of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. due to the sale of Handphones on May 19, 2018 among the facts charged against Defendant A, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
In addition, in light of the records, the court below did not send a written decision on the renewal of the period of detention to Defendant A and did not err by infringing Defendant A’s right of defense and fundamental rights.
In addition, Defendant A stated in the notice of the grounds of appeal that “the court below erred by violating the Constitution, laws, orders, or rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment,” and did not state specific grounds for this, it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground of appeal.
3. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B and C, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less
Therefore, in this case where Defendant B and C were sentenced to a more minor sentence, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.