The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The lower court rejected Defendant’s assertion as to Defendant’s mental disorder on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental disorder, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, according to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance and asserted only mental and physical disorder and unreasonable sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of mistake in the judgment of the court below shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to normal participation or the violation of the rules of evidence is ultimately an unfair sentencing.

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 is allowed. As such, the above assertion to the effect that the Defendant’s fine is unreasonable cannot be 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.