The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the law of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles on the intent of unlawful acquisition

In addition, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in incomplete deliberation on sentencing conditions.

The assertion that there is an error of law beyond the limit of sentencing discretion constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

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 not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a fine is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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