All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act with respect to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, and thus, in this case where a minor sentence is imposed against the Defendant, the allegation that punishment is too unreasonable is not legitimate

2. As to the Defendant F’s grounds of appeal, Defendant F violated the principle of equality by reducing discretionary mitigation only against his accomplice and not reducing discretionary mitigation against the Defendant.

The assertion that there was an error that the defendant did not take the part in the reduction of a self-denunciation constitutes an assertion of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the above assertion that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment below is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, according 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. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable

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