The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the Defendant asserted in the statement of grounds of appeal that he did not make a judgment on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal, and even if the Defendant stated the above grounds of appeal on the first day of the lower court trial and did not clearly withdraw the above assertion, the lower court can find that the Defendant did not consider the grounds of appeal as the grounds of unreasonable sentencing

However, in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the investigation of this case cannot be deemed to constitute an illegal naval investigation, and such omission of judgment by the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment.

The argument that Article 35 of the Criminal Act concerning aggravation of repeated crime is unconstitutional is that the defendant asserts that it is the ground for appeal, or that it is not subject to a judgment ex officio by the court below, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal.

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, or the argument that the case in this case should be tried together with other cases, cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Meanwhile, even upon examining the record, the lower court did not err by infringing on the Defendant’s right to assistance of counsel, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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