1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of all of the frauds arising from the receipt of special activity expenses out of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, it is justifiable for the lower court to reverse the first instance judgment and to render a not-guilty verdict on the grounds that there is no evidence of crime as to the obstruction of the performance of the official duties in deceptive scheme among the facts charged in the instant case, and there was no error by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “public official” in the obstruction of the performance of official duties

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