All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Although examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on Defendant B’s grounds of appeal based on evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts contrary to logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to admissibility of evidence of the suspect examination protocol prepared by the prosecutor is not a legitimate ground of appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal by the defendant as the ground of appeal or not being judged ex officio.

Meanwhile, 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 argument that the sentencing of the

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act with respect to Defendant C’s appeal, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. As such, in this case where the court rendered a minor sentence against the Defendant, the argument that the amount of the sentence

Other grounds of appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal under each subparagraph of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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