1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the grounds for Defendant A’s appeal, only in a case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is pronounced, an appeal based on unfair sentencing is permitted. As such, in the instant case where Defendant A was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted Defendant B of all of the facts charged in the instant case of violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving Acts and subordinate statutes and of frauds against the victim W, Y, AM, and AP, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by violating logical and empirical rules and exceeding the bounds 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 with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, in this case where Defendant B was sentenced to minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for final appeal.

3. Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records, it is just that the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which found Defendant B and D guilty on the ground that each of the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant B and D constituted a case where there is no proof of criminal facts against the victim AJ and K, and it is not guilty. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by violating the logical and empirical rules and exceeding the bounds of the free

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided by all participating Justices.