1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s judgment that found Defendant A guilty of the fraud of the victim B among the facts charged against Defendant A on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles.

In addition, according to the records, the defendant A appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and argued only the mistake of facts as to the fraud of the victim B on the grounds of appeal and the illegality of sentencing.

In such a case, the allegation that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine on the forgery of private documents and the exercise of the falsified document is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Meanwhile, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the methods of examining and determining sentencing by deviating from the inherent limits of sentencing discretion is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of an unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

Defendant

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. The prosecutor's grounds of appeal belong to the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court as long as the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence, which are the premise thereof, do not go beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The appeal is also based on this

In addition, the recognition of criminal facts in a criminal trial must be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, so if the prosecutor's proof does not reach it, a part of the conviction shall be added.