All appeals are dismissed.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Examining the reasoning of the Defendant’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was guilty of this case’s facts charged (excluding the portion without charge).
Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the appeal did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
In addition, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on sentencing and by infringing on the essential contents of the principle of balance of punishment or the principle of responsibility is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.
Therefore, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.
2. As to the reasons for the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on March 22, 2013, on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the purchase of philophones among the facts charged in the instant case, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below 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 principles on the admissibility of evidence
3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.