The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that convicted of attempted murder among the facts charged in the instant case.

The judgment below

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 of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of murder, without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

The argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of omission in judgment on the defectiveness is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, according 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 not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred in omission of judgment as to self-defense or necessity of emergency evacuation is not a legitimate ground for appeal, since the defendant asserts this as a ground for appeal, or the court below did not consider it as a subject of ex officio.

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