1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant F, criminal facts should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and probative value of evidence based on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding

(Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal as to the mistake of facts by deeming that Defendant F conspiredd with C, A, etc. and carried out the act of establishing a constituent element as stated in the lower judgment.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is nothing more than misunderstanding the judgment of the court below on the selection and probative value of evidence which belongs to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding, and the reasoning of the judgment below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in light of the above legal principles and the evidence duly admitted.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the grounds of appeal that the lower court, while sentencing, deviates from or abused the scope of the discretion of sentencing, the above allegation ultimately addresses the lower court’s determination on the sentencing.

However, 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. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant F, the above assertion disputing the judgment on the sentencing of the lower court is not a legitimate

2. As to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, according to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, punishment of death or imprisonment with prison labor for life or for not less than ten years.