The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of purchasing phiphones around February 2014 among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by violating the principle of free evaluation of evidence

In addition, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balanced criminal punishment or the principle of responsibility.

The argument to the effect that punishment or punishment is too unreasonable is ultimately an argument of unreasonable sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

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