The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the record, even if examining the record, the court below did not err by infringing the defendant's right to challenge the trial procedure and the right to have the assistance of a state appointed defense counsel.

According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below violated the principle of balance of punishment or the principle of responsibility by omitting judgment on the basic facts of sentencing and deviates from the inherent limits of sentencing discretion constitutes the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, according to 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on 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.