All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds for the Defendant’s appeal, the argument that the lower court erred in the deliberation of sentencing conditions constitutes an unfair judgment for sentencing.

Accordingly, under 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 is permitted on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, it is justifiable for the lower court to have acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the violation of the Road Traffic Act among the facts charged in the instant case, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, by admitting a fact beyond the limit of free fluorism in violation of logical and empirical rules.

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