The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment convicting of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence) due to the intermediation of sale and purchase of Mepta, among the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment and admissibility of a crime of violating the Narcotics Control Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

In principle, the progress of the trial proceedings and the adoption of the application for examination of evidence are matters at the discretion of the court. Thus, even if the court below rejected the Defendant’s application for witness and the application for change of the date, it cannot be deemed that there was a mistake

It is not different even if considering the circumstances that errors were corrected in the trial records of the court below.

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