All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the records on Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, Defendant A appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, 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

Defendant

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

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, C, D, E, and F in light of the duly admitted evidence, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on predictability or causation in the crime of false aggravation, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, C, E, and F, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal by the said Defendants, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal by the Defendants B, C, and C, C, C, and C, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of robbery or robbery, as alleged in the grounds of appeal by the Defendants C, C, and C, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, 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

Defendant

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against B, C, D, and E, the above Defendants’ assertion to the effect that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.