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. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor in light of the records, it is justifiable for the lower court to have maintained the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant B and C of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning on the grounds that there was no proof of the relevant crime, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by violating

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty of the instant facts charged 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 exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred in the facts on the basis of sentencing is the argument of unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, the argument that the determination of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. The court below is just in finding Defendant B and C guilty of the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Act on Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits against Defendant B and C, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below erred by violating logical and empirical rules and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.