1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant A’s grounds for appeal, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that Defendant A was guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (EM players) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of free

On the other hand, Defendant A appealed each part of the judgment of the court below regarding fraud. However, without stating the grounds for appeal, Defendant A did not state the “written grounds for appeal” or “written grounds for appeal 2” on the grounds of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that Defendant B was guilty of this case’s facts charged (except for the part without charge) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free conviction

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