All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the defendant's appeal

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the recognition of facts should be proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For the reasons as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant conspired to acquire investment money from F and victim E, and that there was no intention and ability to have P opened and operate a hospital, and rejected the allegation of grounds for appeal by misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the free evaluation principle

B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the grounds for appeal that the lower court’s argument regarding the unfair argument of sentencing exceeded the inherent bounds of sentencing determination in violation of the principle of balance of crime and the principle of responsibility, the allegation of the grounds for appeal in question is the purport of substantially disputing the lower judgment

However, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of the punishment, including the above argument, is unfair is legitimate.