1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) on the grounds indicated 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

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty on the grounds indicated 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, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by

3. As to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendants on the grounds that all the facts charged (excluding the portion guilty) in the instant case did not prove a crime, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

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 is no error of law of violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, but does not state the grounds for objection to this part in the petition of appeal and appellate brief.

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