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

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the instant facts charged were guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In doing so, the court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in law due to significant deviation from sentencing discretion is ultimately an unfair judgment.

Therefore, under 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 has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.

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