1. According to the records on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal, Defendant A appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted the unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, examining various circumstances, such as Defendant A’s age personality and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and circumstances after the crime, etc., even if considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal, it is extremely unfair to maintain the judgment of the first instance court that sentenced the above Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six years, fines not exceeding KRW 90 million, and additional charges not exceeding KRW 75 million.

2. Review of the record on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal reveals that Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted the illegality of sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the court below's assertion that there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes among the facts charged in this case is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not consider the conditions of sentencing and violated the principle of equality under the Constitution is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, examining various circumstances, such as Defendant B’s age character and behavior, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s judgment of the first instance court, which sentenced the Defendant to four years of imprisonment, cannot be deemed extremely unfair, even in light of the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided by all participating Justices.