1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted Defendant A of all of the charges in the instant case, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, of violation of the Act on the Registration of Fraud and Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name. In so doing, it did not err by violating logical and empirical rules and the principle of free evaluation of evidence, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. According to the record as to Defendant F’s grounds of appeal, Defendant F asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal on the first instance judgment.

In this case, the argument that the judgment below erred in mistake of facts cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, the lower court did not err in its determination as otherwise 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 labor for more 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 argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not legitimate

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