1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant A 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 found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds as indicated in its holding, and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and the blanket crime, etc., by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

In addition, 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 not less 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 against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

2. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant B 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 found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged in this case (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so determining, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending

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