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 determined that Defendant A was guilty of all of the facts charged in this case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal doctrine

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 determined that Defendant B was guilty of all of the facts charged in this case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules

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. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant B, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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