1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the fraud of G among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding

2. As to the reasons for the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant on the ground that the fraud of M among the facts charged in the instant case constituted a case where there is no proof of crime, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty.

The judgment below

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to deception in the crime of deception, by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the act of deception.

On the other hand, although the prosecutor appealed to the entire judgment of the court below, the prosecutor did not state specific reasons in the petition of appeal as to the conviction and did not state the reasons 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.