All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

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

In such cases, the lower court’s assertion that there was an error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the mistake of facts or the calculation of the amount of additional collection, the violation of the law by an attorney, and the establishment of a crime of aiding and abetting cannot be a legitimate ground

B. In addition, even if we look at the judgment below, there is no error of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the number of days of detention prior to the pronouncement of the judgment is naturally included in the original sentence by law, and there is no need to separately determine matters concerning the inclusion of the number of days of detention prior to the pronouncement of the judgment. Therefore, the argument that the court below erred in failing to enter matters concerning the inclusion of the number of days of detention prior to the pronouncement of the judgment in the judgment is

Meanwhile, the argument that the judgment below erred in violation of Article 51 of the Criminal Act because it exceeds the inherent limit of the sentencing discretion in accordance with the principle of balance of crimes or the principle of responsibility or does not properly take into account the circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, constitutes an unfair argument for sentencing.

However, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, the argument that the Defendants’ punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for final appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal in light of the records, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, issued a bribe to Defendant A and Defendant B among the facts charged of the instant case.