All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court recognized that the Defendants’ acquisition of stolen goods, which are the primary facts charged, was the stolen goods purchased from J.

For the reason that it is difficult to see that the Defendants neglected the duty of care to check whether the Defendants were stolen or stolen while purchasing cell phones from J.

For the reason that it is difficult to see that the Defendants committed fraud (3) at the time when the Defendants got the J to open the so-called “the so-called “the so-called voice” by using the identity card of the person.

On the ground that it is difficult to view all of the facts constituting a case without proof.

The judgment below

In light of the records, such judgment below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of logic and experience, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to willful negligence in the crime of acquiring stolen goods and the duty of care in the crime of acquiring stolen goods, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the duty of care in the

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