1. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court acquitted the Defendants on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the fraud portion among the charges against the Defendants on December 1, 2015, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of 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 against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the criminal intent of deception and deception

2. As to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of fraud on December 15, 2016 among the facts charged against the Defendants on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the criminal intent of deception and deception.

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 more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed.

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

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