The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and argued only mental disorder and sentencing unfair on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles is not a legitimate ground for appeal, which is alleged by the defendant as the ground for appeal or by the court below as not being subject to an ex officio decision.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, it is just that the court below rejected the defendant's argument about mental and physical weakness on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there is no error by misapprehending the legal principles on mental and physical weakness as alleged in

Meanwhile, the argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing erred by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance of punishment or the principle of responsibility constitutes an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

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

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