The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the records and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the relevant statutes or legal principles, as alleged in the grounds of appeal. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the compensation amount of KRW 30,000,000 according to the victim’s application for compensation, as otherwise stated in its reasoning

In addition, according to the records, while appealed from the judgment of the first instance, the defendant asserted mental and physical disorder as well as mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of sentencing for reasons of appeal, but revoked the grounds for appeal of mental and physical disorder on the second trial date of the court below.

In such a case, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not recognize mental disorder is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Meanwhile, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the reasons for sentencing is ultimately unfair.

According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in the instant case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unfair cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal

Other grounds of appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal under each subparagraph of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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