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

2. Although examining the reasoning of Defendant D’s appeal in light of evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on joint principal offenders and additional collection, etc., without failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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 is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a minor sentence is imposed against Defendant D, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant E and F on the grounds that there was no proof of crime regarding the facts charged against Defendant E and F.

In light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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