The appeal is dismissed.

On September 8, 2019, the second sentence of the first instance judgment was “as of September 21, 2019” and “as of September 21, 2019:40.”

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

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

Furthermore, according to the records, it is evident that the “as of September 8, 2019,” as of September 2, 201 of the first instance judgment, which is written as the date and time of the instant crime, is a clerical error in the “as of September 21, 2019,” and thus, there is no error of mistake of facts in the lower judgment.

According to 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 380(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal shall be dismissed, and since there is any apparent error in the reasoning of the first instance judgment as above, it shall be corrected ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

September 18, 2020