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. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes Act”) in the facts charged against Defendant A, on November 2014, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on illegally collected evidence, “Fraud or other unlawful act” as stipulated in Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and the principle of

According to 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 more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against Defendant A, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. The lower court found Defendant B guilty of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act among the facts charged against Defendant B on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on illegally collected evidence.

3. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor

A. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court acquitted Defendant A on the part of the charges against Defendant A concerning the police officers of December 2, 2013, the police officers of December 2013, the part of the charges against Defendant A, the part of the violation of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (recepting) around August 2016, the part of the charges against Defendant A, the part of the fraud, and the part of the

The judgment below

The relevant legal principles and reasons.