All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant A of taking advantage of the charge of breach of trust among the facts charged against Defendant A.

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err 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 “illegal solicitation” in the crime of taking property in breach of trust.

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

Defendant

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

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

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

As seen above, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed.

Defendant

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

3. As to the Defendant D’s grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant D of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes Act”) among the facts charged against Defendant D (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) (excluding the part not guilty).

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations in its judgment.