All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the argument that the lower court erred by exceeding the inherent limit of sentencing discretion is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, according to 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 not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

Defendant

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against B, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 a crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.

The argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing contains an error of incomplete deliberation on basic facts for sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, as examined earlier, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed.

Defendant

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against C, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.