The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds the lower court, on April 29, 2014, acknowledged that the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 8, 2014 and the crime for which the said judgment was committed prior to the final and conclusive judgment was concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 29, 2014 were committed at the Jinwon District Court’s Jinju branch, and the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act were deemed to be concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In determining the punishment, the lower court reversed the judgment of the first instance and sentenced the said

Examining the record and related legal principles, the above determination by the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, as alleged in the grounds

2. In addition, even if self-denunciation was merely a reason for voluntary mitigation, it does not necessarily need to be taken into account in sentencing. Thus, we cannot accept the allegation that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on self-denunciation by failing to reduce the number of self-denunciation despite the number of self-denunciation.

3. In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not legitimate

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