All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant B, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed.

Defendant

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against B, the argument that punishment is too unreasonable cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. As to the grounds for appeal by Defendant D, the lower court found Defendant D guilty of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Defense Secrets among the facts charged in the instant case and additionally collected KRW 9,900,000 from Defendant D.

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 against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on additional collection, as alleged in the grounds of appeal

Whether to adopt the application for examination of evidence is, in principle, necessary by the court at the discretion of the court.

In determining the seal, it may not be examined (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 2011, etc.). Thus, even if the lower court did not accept the Defendant D’s application for witness, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

Of the facts charged in this case, the assertion that Defendant D erred by mistake on the part of Defendant D’s violation of justice is the ground for appeal, or that the court below did not consider Defendant D as the subject of judgment ex officio, and thus, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant F, the lower court found Defendant F guilty of the instant facts charged against Defendant F on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s judgment is limited to the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules.