Even if examining the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding “an act of making false or exaggerated information or inducing or trading with consumers by using deceptive means,” or by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience.

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