All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant B in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts contrary to logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act or joint principal offense, etc., contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant 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 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 B, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

Meanwhile, among the grounds of appeal, the allegation that Defendant B erred in calculating an additional collection charge against Defendant B is the grounds of appeal, or that the court below did not consider it as the subject of judgment ex officio, and it is not a legitimate ground of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the Defendant L’s ground of appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s judgment, which maintained the first instance judgment ordering the collection of KRW 89,500,000 against Defendant L, did not err by misapprehending the facts contrary to logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in

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