1. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is just in holding that the court below was guilty of both the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act due to false reporting on the check number K, N and R unit tickets among the facts charged in the instant case (excluding the part not guilty and dismissed from prosecution) and the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act due to non-payment refusal. Contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against the logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the relevant legal principles, or by

In addition, the argument that the court below's decision to the effect that considering the defendant A's escape as an unfavorable factor in sentencing is unfair is ultimately an argument of unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 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 on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where the court below rendered a more minor sentence against the defendant A, the argument that the sentencing

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged (excluding the part dismissing prosecution) was guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle

In addition, the judgment of the court below deviates from its discretion.