The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the court of first instance, the court below’s determination that the conjunctive charge of this case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on “Assault” in quasi-Robbery.

In addition, the first instance court's participatory trial procedure violated the law, but the court below erred by the judgment.

The argument that there was an error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the admissibility of evidence of the photographs submitted by the victim is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the defendant alleged in the ground for appeal that the court below did not consider it as the ground for appeal or that it was not subject to ex officio

In addition, under 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of

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