All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty of all the charges of this case (excluding the portion without charge) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles as to the act of deception, mistake, or the act of ex post facto action in fraud, which violates logical and empirical rules, thereby exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

In addition, examining various circumstances, including Defendant A’s age character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., it cannot be said that the lower court’s maintenance of the first instance judgment, which sentenced Defendant A imprisonment with prison labor for 22 years, is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, it is justifiable for the lower court to have affirmed the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant A on the ground that all of the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A did not have any proof of crime, on the following grounds: (a) the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) among the facts charged in the instant case; (b) the part of the funds of N, Co., Ltd, P, and P and some of the funds of similar recipients; and (c) the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts beyond the limit of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles as to illegal acquisition intent and joint principal offenders.

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