The appeal is dismissed.

According to the records, the defendant can be found to have asserted of misunderstanding of facts in the statement of grounds for appeal, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant withdrawn the above assertion of misunderstanding of facts in the court below trial date.

Nevertheless, the court below found that the defendant's grounds for appeal are limited to mental and physical disability and unreasonable sentencing.

The Defendant asserted a mistake of facts in the grounds of appeal, and the lower court may be deemed to include the allegation that the lower court omitted the judgment on the above grounds of appeal.

However, according to the evidence adopted by the court of first instance maintained by the court below, since the defendant can be fully admitted to the facts charged in this case, the above error of omission does not affect the judgment.

In addition, considering the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below is just in rejecting the defendant's assertion on mental and physical disability, and there is no error of law in misapprehension of legal principles as to mental and physical disability

Meanwhile, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may only be lodged by death penalty, imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence was imposed on the defendant, an appeal is not allowed to be filed with the Supreme Court on the ground

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