The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The ground of appeal as to the fraud which the court below found guilty is that the defendant is not guilty because he had the ability and intent to repay the borrowed money as stated in the judgment of the court below.

However, in light of the evidence duly admitted, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged as to the fraud of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning is justified.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of illegality or fraud, which found the fact to have exceeded the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

On the other hand, the Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance on the larceny of habitual night structures among the facts charged in the instant case, and asserted the misunderstanding of facts together with the sentencing unfair on the grounds of the appeal, but withdrawn the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts on the third trial date of the lower court.

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles on the larceny of habitual night structures among the judgment below is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not properly consider the grounds for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and that there was an error of law in violation of the rules of evidence, deliberation, and fact-finding without considering the grounds for sentencing is ultimately unfair.

However, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate appeal.

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