All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of fraud among the facts charged against Defendant A.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by omitting necessary judgment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Defendant

Examining various circumstances, including the A’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court, which sentenced 10 years to Defendant A, is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the Defendant C’s grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant C of the facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of 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 against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of crimes of fraud, fabrication of private documents, and uttering of falsified documents, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The argument that the lower court erred in failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations on the grounds for sentencing constitutes the allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant C, the argument that punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided by all participating Justices.