1. As to the grounds for appeal by Defendant A and B, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by exceeding the limit of the discretion of sentencing due to a lack of deliberation on the circumstances under which the conditions of sentencing are attached is ultimately an unfair argument of sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against A and B, the argument that punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning for Defendant E and G’s appeal 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 E and G was guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the establishment of a crime of violating the Medical Service Act, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

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