The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of habitual assault among the facts charged of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on

In addition, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, it is just that the court below rejected the defendant's assertion on mental and physical disability, and there is no error of not recognizing mental and physical disability as alleged in the grounds of appeal

Meanwhile, 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

Other grounds of appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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