All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant A’s ground of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the final appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without

Defendant

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against A, the judgment of the court below is unreasonable.

In this regard, the argument that the judgment of the court below omitted the determination of sentencing cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. According to the record as to Defendant B’s allegation in the grounds of appeal, Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in incomplete deliberation or misapprehension of legal principles is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, even after ex officio examination of the court below, there is no error of law such as misapprehension of legal principles, which is alleged as the ground for appeal in regard to the rate of injury to continue existence of an organization or group.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years

Defendant

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against B, the judgment of the court below is unreasonable.

The argument that the lower court’s judgment erred by exceeding the scope of discretion in sentencing does not constitute a legitimate ground 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.