The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, 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 exceeding the legal doctrine on the degree of proof necessary for the recognition of criminal facts.

In addition, the argument that Co-defendant B received the warrant of seizure from the police and made a false confession is not a legitimate ground of appeal, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant deemed it a ground of appeal or that the court below did not consider it as an object of judgment ex officio. Furthermore, even if we

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