All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, Defendant B and C appealed appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted mistake of facts, misapprehension of legal principles, and unfair sentencing as grounds for appeal, but withdrawn the allegation of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the first trial date of the original instance

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred in mistake, incomplete deliberation, or misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

According to Article 279 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 141 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the presiding judge may request the prosecutor, the defendant or his/her defense counsel to interrogate or prove the evidence as part of the direction of the lawsuit.

Here, the explanation means that the parties are given an opportunity to ask questions as to the factual and legal matters and to supplement or correct their statements or arguments in order to clarify the litigation relations of the case. Thus, if the statements or arguments of the parties in respect of a certain matter are clear, the matters are not subject to the explanation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do1238 delivered on June 11, 199). According to the records, Defendant B and C clearly withdrawn the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the first trial date of the court below. Thus, even if the court below did not request Defendant B and C to testify as to whether Defendant B and C made a mistake of facts, it cannot be said that there was an error of law such as incomplete deliberation due to the non-exercise of right to request Elucidation, and misapprehension of legal principles, contrary to what is alleged in the

The argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles and incomplete deliberation on the circumstances attached to sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

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

In this case where the Defendants were sentenced to a more minor sentence, punishment shall be imposed.