1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to Defendant C’s grounds of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may be filed only when the court below rendered a sentence of death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years. Thus, an appeal to the Supreme Court is not allowed on the grounds that the amount of punishment imposed on

2. According to the records on Defendant D’s grounds of appeal, Defendant D appealed against the judgment of the first instance [In Incheon District Court Decision 201Da7048, 2012 Highest 692 (Joint)] and asserted only mistake of facts and unfair sentencing as to the crime of fraud against Defendant D as the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, it is not allowed to appeal to the Supreme Court for a new reason that there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the crime of fraud and embezzlement against victim H.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may be filed only when the court below rendered a sentence of death penalty, imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years. Thus, in a case where the court below rendered a minor sentence against Defendant D, the ground that the sentencing of a sentence is unreasonable cannot be

3. Examining the Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court was justifiable to have acquitted Defendant A, B, and D on the ground that there was no proof of each of the relevant crimes on the following grounds: (a) the fraud of Defendant B among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant B; (b) the use of private documents among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant B; and (c) the use of a falsified investigation document; and (b) the fraud against the Defendant

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, it violates logical and empirical rules or commits fraud.