All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the reasons for Defendant A’s appeal, the lower court rejected Defendant A’s assertion that the sentence should be mitigated or exempted on the grounds that it is difficult to view Defendant A’s statement in the court of first instance as a confession for the instant crime.

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in violation of logical and empirical rules, such as exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in violation of the rules of evidence, misunderstanding of legal principles, and principle of free evaluation of evidence 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 not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of punishment is unfair in this case where Defendant A was sentenced to minor punishment is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. As to Defendant B’s appeal, Defendant B and the defense counsel did not submit the reason for appeal within the statutory period ( Defendant B received the notice of receipt of records of trial on December 15, 2015 and did not submit the reason for appeal by January 4, 2016, which was the submission period for the written reason for appeal, after the statutory period expires, the defense counsel submitted the reason for appeal jointly with Defendant A), and there is no indication of the reason for appeal in the petition of appeal.

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