The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment, the court below was just in finding the defendant guilty of habitual larceny among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the law of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles on habitual larceny.

In addition, pursuant 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 more 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 punishment is too unreasonable cannot be

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