The lower court convicted the Defendants of all the charges of this case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, without failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the intentional act of interfering with bidding, calculation of the amount of fraud and fraud, and deception of the crime of interference with the performance of public duties by deceptive means.

According to Article 383 (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 declared, an appeal can be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Therefore, in this case where the defendant A was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the above assertion or punishment is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

The Defendants’ final appeals are without merit and all are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.