The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of special injury among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “hazardous goods” and “personal belongings.”

In addition, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine of Article 51 of the Criminal Act concerning sentencing conditions is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

Therefore, under 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 has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.

Other grounds of appeal are not legitimate grounds of appeal, since all the defendant's assertion of violation of the rules of evidence, mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and political party defense are asserted as grounds of appeal, or the court below's decision is not subject to judgment ex officio.

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