The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the Defendant alleged in the statement of grounds of appeal that “the Defendant had no criminal intent to obtain fraud regarding paragraphs 1 through 4 of the facts charged, and the victim is not K with regard to Paragraph 5 of the facts charged, and did not deceiving the victim as to Paragraph 6 of the facts charged,” and that the Defendant did not clearly withdraw the statement of grounds of appeal and the argument to mistake facts on the first trial date of the lower court, but the lower court did not determine the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of appeal deeming the Defendant’s grounds of appeal as unreasonable.

However, in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s omission of judgment does not affect the conclusion of the judgment, as it is found guilty of the facts charged in this case.

The argument that the judgment of the court below erred in violation of the principle of balance of crime or the principle of responsibility constitutes the argument 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 against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too 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.