1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, the argument that there is a violation of the rules of evidence, which serves as the basis for sentencing, constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, according to 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 is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

Defendant

In this case where a minor sentence is imposed against A, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the Defendants on the grounds that there was no proof of a crime as to the Defendants’ violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. related to Defendants A, C’s I building in Guro-gu Seoul, L-related Violence Act (joint residence intrusion), and Defendant A and B’s non-cheon-si N building in Bupyeongcheon-si, N, O and Seocheon Qgu, R-related Act (joint residence intrusion), and special larceny.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the timing of acceptance in the crime of intrusion upon residence, requirements for establishing joint principal offenders, and requirements for establishing joint principal

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