1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant D in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged against Defendant D was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so determining, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on Defendant E’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s order to collect the amount as indicated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, but did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence

In addition, pursuant 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is permitted. Thus, in this case where the above defendant was sentenced to a minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable and that the exemption from the surcharge is requested to be made

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