All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable in finding Defendant A guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding the part not guilty of the lower court) 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 rules of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in incomplete deliberation on sentencing data constitutes the argument 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 against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

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

In this case, the argument that the court below erred in the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of legal principles shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, the lower court did not err in its determination as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant B, the argument that punishment is too unreasonable cannot be a legitimate ground for

3. As to Defendant C’s ground of appeal

A. The lower court’s judgment on the first ground of appeal is justifiable.