The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court’s conviction of all the charges of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds for the exclusion of illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal

In addition, among the grounds of appeal, the argument that the defendant was not served on the defendant and his defense counsel with a copy of the application for modification of the indictment as of July 2, 2013 in the procedure for permission of modification of the indictment of the first instance among the grounds of appeal is not legitimate grounds of appeal since the defendant's ground of appeal is asserted only when the court below

Furthermore, even after examining the record, the application for permission to amend the Bill of Indictment on July 2, 2013 is merely a specification of the contents of the application for permission to amend the Bill of Indictment as of April 4, 2013, and the defendant and his/her defense counsel stated that the application is without any opinion. In light of the fact that the details of the application for permission to amend the Bill of Indictment as of July 2, 2013 are mentioned in detail in the statement of grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below cannot be said to have erred by depriving the defendant of his/her opportunity to present his/her arguments

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