The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Victims E (Indecent act by force of minors under the age of 13) and rejected the Defendant’s assertion disputing the intention of indecent act or indecent act by force.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the fact-finding by the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the evidence selection and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the lower court.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of logic and experience and the free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the degree of proof necessary to recognize a guilty, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, Article 51 of the Criminal Act and matters concerning whether the circumstances before the opening of a sentence are obvious belongs to the court’s discretion on the determination of punishment, and Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act permits an appeal on unfair sentencing only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. Thus, in this case where the Defendant was sentenced to a fine on the Defendant, the failure to suspend the sentence differently from the first instance court, even though there was no ground for disqualification for

The argument that punishment is too unreasonable shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

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