1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Public Official Election Act of May 29, 2014 among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the criminal intent of offering money and valuables, contrary to what

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act with respect to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. Thus, in this case where the above Defendant was sentenced to a minor sentence, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

3. Reviewing the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor in light of the record, it is justifiable to maintain the first instance court that acquitted the Defendants on the violation of the Public Official Election Act as of April 14, 2014 among the facts charged in the instant case, and each of the violations of the Public Official Election Act as of April 8, 2014 and May 2, 2014, based on the lack of proof of crime. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the accomplice or by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment below, but there is no indication of the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal and there is no statement of the grounds for appeal in the appellate brief.

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