The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the records, while appealed against the judgment of the first instance, the defendant asserted mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as well as unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, but withdrawn the allegation of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the third trial of the original instance, and left only the grounds for unfair sentencing as grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, or incomplete hearing cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even upon examining records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument of incomplete deliberation on sentencing conditions constitutes the argument of unfair 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 ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable cannot be a

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