beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant B, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal based on unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, the argument that the above Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.
2. Examining the reasoning of Defendant G’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was guilty of this case’s charges on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, 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 the joint principal offender and burden of proof
Since the court of final appeal is a follow-up trial on the judgment of the appellate court, matters which are not subject to adjudication in the appellate court are not different from the scope of deliberation on the appeal, and thus, it cannot be used as a ground for appeal against the grounds other than those which the defendant did not assert as a ground for appeal in the appellate court or which the appellate court is subject to adjudication ex officio (see Supreme Court Decision 99Do2831, Mar. 28, 2000). In such a case, the argument that the defendant's defense right was infringed on because his/her cellular phone was not returned from the prosecutor, which was submitted by the above defendant's defense counsel after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal, is alleged in the summary of his/her oral argument or that the above defendant did not use it as a ground for appeal, and therefore, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.
B. Even if I examine the record, there is no such error in the judgment of the court below.
3. Therefore, the conclusion is reasonable.