The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

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 legislative authority’s freedom of formation permitted by the above law. Thus, since the provision of the above law is in violation of Article 101(2) of the Constitution or the right of the Supreme Court to a trial, or it cannot be deemed an unconstitutional provision contrary to the principle of equality (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1808, Apr. 26, 2007). Thus, the argument that Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act is unconstitutional is rejected.

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 has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for

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