The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of Defendant A’s appeal, the lower court did not err by infringing Defendant A’s right of defense, Defendant A’s final opportunity to state his/her opinion, etc. in the litigation proceedings.

According to the records, Defendant A appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and only alleged unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts as to the time of Defendant A’s participation in the crime is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

According to Article 383 (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 is imposed, a final 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. According to the records on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal, Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted the sentencing on the grounds of the appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts as to the time when Defendant B participated in the crime is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

According to Article 383 (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 is imposed, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

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

3. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on the grounds of Defendant D’s appeal, the lower court’s judgment that found Defendant D guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In this regard, the limit of free evaluation of evidence is limited in violation of logical and empirical rules.