The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The lower court: (a) allowed the amendment of the indictment to the effect that the name of the instant indictment was changed to “Habitual Assault” in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; and (b) the applicable statutory provision changed to “Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 350(1) of the Criminal Act” in “Article 351 and Article 350(1) of the Criminal Act; and (c) reversed the first instance judgment and punished the Defendant as a habitual rapion.

The court below did not err in the application of the law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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 argument about mental and physical weakness on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or mistake of facts, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Other grounds for appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds for 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.