1. According to the records on Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous due to violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete deliberation shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, pursuant 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 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 on Defendant B, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, it is justifiable for the lower court to reverse the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A of this case on the ground that there is no evidence of crime as to the facts charged (excluding the part guilty of the original conviction) against Defendant A on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and to have acquitted the Defendant. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

In addition, pursuant 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, in this case where a fine is imposed against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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