1. The argument that Defendant A’s ground of appeal contains an error of mistake of facts as to the grounds for sentencing 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 more minor sentence has been imposed against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant C’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that Defendant C was guilty of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.) against Defendant C 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, there were no errors of misapprehending the rules

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor in light of the records, the lower court is justifiable to have rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of violation of the effect of compulsory execution of real estate against the Defendants among the facts charged in the instant case and obstruction of business against Defendant C, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no

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