The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

"When a defendant is detained" under Article 33 (1) 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to a case where a defendant is already detained and is under trial in the relevant criminal case. Thus, even after a court rendered a judgment against a non-detained defendant, the above provision shall not be deemed to apply until he/she is detained (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do17353, Mar. 10, 201). According to the records, the defendant can be aware of the fact that he/she was under undetained until he/she is detained until he/she is detained (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do17353, Mar. 10, 201). Thus, the court below's decision without selecting a counsel against the defendant, and the court below's decision cannot be deemed to be illegal, and there is no illegality such as deprivation of the defendant's opportunity to state his/her opinion

In addition, the argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing erred by deviating from the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence and violating the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of the rule of experience or logic as to the basic facts of sentencing and violating the principle of free evaluation of evidence is ultimately an unfair argument of sentencing.

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

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