The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have convicted all of the facts charged of the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the duty of disclosure and deception in fraud, Article 38 of the Infant Care Act, and the legal principles on “necessary expenses” and “Guidance on Health and Welfare Child Care Services (201 and 2012)” or by violating the legal principles on the type of crime and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been pronounced, an appeal may be filed on the ground that the court below erred in sentencing or grave mistake of facts has influenced the judgment.

Therefore, in this case where a fine is imposed on the Defendants, the allegations that Defendant A’s punishment is unfair because it was too unreasonable, and the allegations of violation of the rules of evidence are not legitimate grounds for appeal without deliberation to the effect that the selection of evidence and fact-finding, which belong to the exclusive jurisdiction of the lower court, are practically disputed.

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