The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Upon examining the reasoning in light of the records, the court below is just in rejecting the defendant's assertion of mental disability based on its stated reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to mental disability.

In addition, according to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and argued only mental and physical disability and unreasonable sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the judgment below erred in violation of the rules of evidence shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below violated the principle of responsibility and proportionality in sentencing and deviates from the discretion of sentencing constitutes the argument 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 is unfair

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