1. According to the records on Defendant J’s grounds of appeal, Defendant J asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal, while appealed against the judgment of the first instance court.

In such a case, the new argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by mistake of facts, incomplete deliberation, and violation of the rules of evidence constitutes the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where Defendant J rendered a minor sentence against Defendant J, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not legitimate grounds for appeal.

2. The argument that the judgment below erred in incomplete deliberation on the grounds for sentencing as to Defendant L’s grounds for appeal constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant L, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate

3. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant A, B, C, E, I, J,K, and N on the ground that each of the instant charges against Defendant G and H constituted fraud, and each of the instant charges against Defendant G and H from May 2013 to February 2014 constituted a case where there is no proof of crime.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court’s above judgment.