All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of defamation among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to intimidation or intimidation among the facts charged in this case is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal by the defendant as the ground for appeal or by the court below as being subject to judgment ex officio.

In addition, under 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 not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

2. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which found the defendant guilty on the ground that there is no proof of crime as to the intimidation against victim D among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced the defendant not guilty. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of intimidation or misunderstanding facts beyond the bounds of

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment below, but the appellate brief does not state the grounds for appeal, and the appellate brief also states the grounds for appeal.