The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

If the appellate court reverses and renders a judgment of the first instance on the grounds that are not included in the grounds for appeal, it shall be deemed that the grounds for appeal alleged by the appellant were determined in the course of determining the punishment, and it shall be deemed that the judgment on the propriety of the grounds for appeal is not separately stated

failure to make any judgment;

In light of the records, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground that the defendant should be mitigated or exempted from punishment pursuant to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act as he/she led to the confession of the instant non-indicted on the first trial date of the court below (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3035, Jun. 29, 2007). According to the records, the court below reversed ex officio the judgment of the court of first instance and determined the punishment against the defendant through pleading.

Therefore, even if the lower court did not separately determine the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, it erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the grounds for appeal or by omitting judgment thereon.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not reduce the amount in accordance with Article 53 of the Criminal Act is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed 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 is not 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.