All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Defendant A

A. The lower court affirmed the first instance judgment that convicted Defendant A of both the injury insurance proceeds and the former loan fraud, among the facts charged against Defendant A, of both the injury insurance proceeds and the former loan fraud.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on fraud and joint principal offenders.

B. In order to establish the crime of abandonment resulting in the death of a person by committing the crime of abandonment (1), the crime of abandonment should first be established. As such, as the offender is stipulated in Article 271(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime of abandonment, the perpetrator constitutes “a person under the legal or contractual obligation to protect a person who needs aid due to old age, disease or other circumstances.”

The legal duty of protection in this article includes the duty of support between husband and wife based on Article 826(1) of the Civil Code.

Article 812(1) of the Civil Act provides that a marriage shall take effect upon reporting as prescribed by the Act on the Registration, etc. of Family Relationship.

Article 826(1) of the Civil Act provides that “A couple shall live together and support and cooperate with each other.”

“.......”

Article 815 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act provides that a marriage shall be null and void in cases where “when there is no agreement between the parties to the marriage,” but the above grounds for nullity of marriage refer to cases where there is no intention to create a mental or physical combination between the parties, which is deemed to be a couple under the social concept.

(2) In light of the following circumstances, the lower court determined that Defendant A had no intention to marry from the time of reporting the marriage.

It is difficult to see that the legal duty to protect the victim is recognized by law, and the judgment of the court of first instance that found the victim guilty of abandonment.