All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal, the lower court’s determination that Defendant A was guilty of all of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In doing so, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the legality of arrest and seizure, illegally collected evidence, admissibility of evidence, etc.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law that deviates from the limit of the discretion of sentencing due to insufficient deliberation on the circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing is ultimately unfair.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant B was guilty of all of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant B on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In conclusion, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the legality of arrest and seizure, illegally collected evidence, admissibility of evidence, etc.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and deliberation on the amount of punishment is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is sentenced.