All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. According to the records on Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In principle, the progress of the trial proceedings and the adoption of the application for examination of evidence belong to the court's discretion. Thus, even if the court below rejected Defendant B's application for resumption of pleadings, it cannot be deemed that the court below erred by infringing on Defendant B's right of defense.

Defendant

Examining various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, such as the age-oriented environment, relationship with the victim, motive means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the lower court cannot be deemed to have sentenced to 11 years of imprisonment with prison labor against the Defendant B even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding Defendant J’s grounds of appeal, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years is imposed.

Therefore, in this case where Defendant J was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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