The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the court below is just to have rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the mental and physical disorder on the grounds of its stated reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the free evaluation

In addition, in light of the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment below, it is just to maintain the judgment of the court of first instance that the court below ordered disclosure of information on the defendant for 10 years since it is difficult to consider that there are special circumstances that should not disclose personal information to the defendant for the reasons stated in its judgment, and there is no violation of law as otherwise

On the other hand, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in the misapprehension of the basic facts for sentencing and the basic contents of the principle of mistake of facts and the principle of responsibility, constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment

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