For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted the victim D and L of each fraud (excluding the acquittal part) among the facts charged in the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on deception of fraud and fraud, and by misapprehending the legal principles on deception of fraud and fraud, or by recognizing conviction without any modification of indictment procedures, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the determination of sentencing and sentencing is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument.

However, under 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 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 the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate

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