All appeals are dismissed.

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

The Defendants’ assertion in the grounds of appeal is that the judgment of the court below is unlawful, since the Defendants did not make a statement that they would give the original title when they borrowed money to the Defendants, not to the Defendants, and even if they did not have a criminal intent to acquire money, the court below found the Defendants guilty by making a false statement, such as K, false fact-finding, and thereby making the other reliable fact-finding.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

Even if examining the reasons in light of the record, the court below cannot find out the reasons that the court below exceeded the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the above argument in the grounds of appeal is merely to criticize matters falling under the exclusive right of the court of original judgment, and it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.

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

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the Defendants, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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