1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant C, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been pronounced, an appeal based on unfair sentencing is allowed. As such, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair in the instant case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendant cannot be a legitimate

2. Regarding the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record as to the grounds for appeal against Defendant B, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant B on the grounds that there was no proof of a crime among the facts charged in the instant case (excluding the guilty part) against Defendant B, and rendered a not guilty verdict on the ancillary facts on the grounds that there was no proof of a crime. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the facts beyond the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending

Meanwhile, among the judgment below, the prosecutor appealed against Defendant B, but did not indicate the grounds of objection to this part of the final appeal and the reasoning of the final appeal.

B. Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records, it is just to reverse the judgment of the court of first instance which found Defendant E guilty on the ground that the facts charged in this case against Defendant E constituted a case where there is no proof of crime, and to render a not guilty verdict. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the public offering principal offender.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.