All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the criminal intent of the crime of bribery to a third party, contrary to what is alleged in

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 of offering of a bribe and occupational embezzlement (except for the portion of acquittal for each reason) among the facts charged against Defendant B, 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 legal doctrine on the crime of offering of a bribe and the intention

Meanwhile, Defendant B did not state specific grounds of appeal in the petition of appeal and the appellate brief as to the violation of the Wastes Control Act due to input of false information, although Defendant B appealed the entire guilty portion of the lower judgment.

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant D’s ground of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable in its judgment that the lower court found Defendant D guilty of the facts charged against Defendant D (excluding the part not guilty and the part not guilty of the grounds for appeal), and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine

4. As to the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, committed against Defendant A among the facts charged of the instant case.