1. As to Defendant E’s grounds of appeal, the lower court rejected Defendant E’s grounds of appeal claiming a misunderstanding of facts, and upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant E of the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by violating the principle of evidence trial.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B and F, the gist of the grounds of appeal by Defendant B and F is that the lower court did not properly consider the conditions of sentencing when determining the sentence against the above Defendants, and thus violates logical and empirical rules, and this constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

According to 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 not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in each case where the above Defendants were sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument disputing the determination of a sentence by the court below, including the above argument, cannot

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