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). The first instance court rejected the Defendant’s assertion asserting that the Defendant is guilty of robbery injury in the judgment of the first instance court, and the lower court did not accept the Defendant’s appeal on the grounds stated in its reasoning, deeming that such first instance judgment is reasonable.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such judgment by the court below is merely an error of the judgment on the selection and probative value of evidence belonging to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding, and the reasoning of the judgment below is examined in light of the above legal principles, the relevant legal principles of the court of first instance, and the evidence duly admitted, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to injury in robbery or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation principle, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

The Supreme Court precedents cited on the grounds of appeal are different from the instant case, and thus are inappropriate to be invoked in the instant case.

In addition, the appeal that the judgment of the court below did not properly determine the sentencing grounds is unfair.

However, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unfair, including the above argument, is unfair

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