The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s mental and physical disorder, on the ground that, although the Defendant did not seem to have had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of committing the instant crime, it could not be mitigated due to mental and physical disorder under Article 10(3) of the Criminal Act, since the occurrence of risk was predicted and the occurrence of a child’

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding mental disorder or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

In addition, 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

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