1. As to the injury caused by robbery among the facts charged in the instant case, Defendant A’s ground of appeal is with the purport that, as to the injury caused by robbery, the Defendant was unlawful by finding erroneous facts by the lower court, and by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of the crime, the Defendant convicted the Defendant by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of the crime, the following purport is that: (a) the victim’s O was merely satisfying electric shock machines to the remainder of the victim, for which the Defendant’s satisfy had an intent to escape the claim for alcohol value or to force money; and (b) the victim’s cellular phone did not have an intent to force the victim to report the assault.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence, which are the premise thereof, belong to the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence

The judgment below

In light of the records, the court below cannot find out the grounds that the court below exceeded the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and there is no illegality in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the establishment of each of the above crimes.

2. Defendant B did not state the grounds of appeal in the petition of appeal and did not submit the appellate brief within the statutory period.

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