The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For the reasons stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the first decision of the lower court, which recognized the injury of robbery among the facts charged in the instant case, constituted the injury of robbery, was justifiable, and rejected the allegation of the grounds for appeal as to mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles, relevant legal principles, and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on injury to robbery or by exceeding the bounds of the free evaluation principle

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of the sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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