The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, while filing an appeal against the judgment of the first instance, the defendant argued that the sentencing was unfair on the grounds of appeal, and that the defendant has withdrawn the grounds for appeal as to mistake of facts at the first trial date of the court below.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, examining the circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, such as the background of the instant crime, method of commission of the crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss beyond the mental weak condition at the time of the instant crime

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the lower court, which did not recognize mental and physical loss, did not err as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant to 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 is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which limits the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, shall be deemed to belong to the territory of the freedom of formation permitted by the legislative authority. Thus, the above provision of the law cannot be deemed to violate the constitutional provisions that stipulate the right to a trial or to be unconstitutional provisions that violate the principle of equality (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1808, Apr. 26, 2007). Thus, the argument that Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act is unconstitutional cannot be accepted.

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