1. The ground of appeal by Defendant A contains an error of law by misunderstanding legal principles in determining sentencing, and ultimately constitutes an allegation of unreasonable sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against Defendant A, the aforementioned assertion or punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, the lower court found Defendant B guilty of all the facts charged in this case on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the act of deception in a joint principal offense

In addition, in this case where a sentence of imprisonment for less than 10 years has been imposed against Defendant B, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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