beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant A and F in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged against Defendant A and F was guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, 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 statutory errors under
2. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant C in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below was just in finding Defendant C guilty of the facts charged in this case for the reasons indicated in its holding, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by violating the logical and empirical rules and by exceeding
3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant G and H’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged against Defendant G and H was guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules
4. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant I 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 Defendant I was guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court exceeded the bounds of the principle of logic and experience and the principle of free evaluation of evidence