All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on such premise are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been declared, the judgment of the court below affected the conclusion.

A final appeal may be made on the ground that there exists a significant reason to recognize the amount of punishment or that the amount of punishment has been extremely unfair.

The summary of the Defendants’ grounds of appeal is that the lower court erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and thereby making erroneous findings of facts in violation of the rules of evidence, and the sentence of the lower court is too excessive, even though the Defendants did not commit any act such as the facts charged (excluding the part on which the Defendants were found innocent in the original trial) or did not intend to obtain any intent to commit such criminal act or to obtain any unlawful intent.

However, the above argument in the grounds of appeal is practically erroneous in the selection of evidence and the fact-finding or sentencing by the court below, and it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal in this case where the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for less than 10 years.

Furthermore, even if examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, there is no ground to deem that the judgment of the court below exceeded the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and there is no error as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.