All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts as to the premise for sentencing or by misapprehending legal principles is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is permitted only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed. Thus, in this case where Defendant A was sentenced to a more minor sentence, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair

2. According to the records as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, Defendant B asserted misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles to deny the public relations relationship with Defendant A, etc. in the grounds of appeal of unfair sentencing along with the assertion of unfair sentencing. Defendant B did not clearly withdraw the above assertion on the trial date of the lower court, but the lower court merely rejected the Defendant’s grounds of appeal on the sole ground of unfair sentencing, and dismissed Defendant’s appeal without rendering a determination of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles

However, according to the records, since Defendant B conspired with Defendant A, etc. to commit the instant fraud, such omission of judgment by the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by mistake of facts as to the premise for sentencing or by misunderstanding of legal principles is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in the case where the judgment of the court below rendered a more minor sentence as to