1. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged (excluding the acquittal portion) against Defendant A on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 relation of conspiracy, the criminal intent of deception, and the principle

The argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that infringes on the essential contents of the principle of balanced criminal punishment or the principle of accountability is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

Defendant

In this case where a minor sentence is imposed against A, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. The lower court found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty) as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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

Defendant

Examining the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, such as the age-oriented environment, relationship with victims, motive means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court cannot be deemed extremely unfair to sentence Defendant B with 13 years in total, even in light of the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.