1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding the part not guilty of the grounds of appeal) on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

With respect to the grounds for ex officio examination, the court of appeals shall judge without any need to examine whether the grounds for appeal are submitted, or whether the grounds for appeal are included in the grounds for appeal. However, with respect to any grounds other than the grounds for ex officio examination, it shall be subject to adjudication only when the grounds for appeal are included in the grounds for appeal submitted within the prescribed period, unless they are stated in the petition of appeal or not. However, the grounds for appeal not included

Even if it is possible to judge ex officio, and on the other hand, the defendant et al. are not included in the grounds of appeal in the appellate court.

This is not included in the grounds for appeal.

(2) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court’s defense counsel held that the Defendant’s assignment of guard staff constitutes a justifiable act, only through a summary of the oral argument submitted on April 15, 2014, after the lapse of the period for filing the statement of grounds of appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4310, July 24, 2008).

In light of the above legal principles, the defendant's assertion of legitimate acts by the defense counsel of the court below is only after the lapse of the time limit for appeal, and it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.