All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants misunderstanding the facts as to the game of this case by operating the game of this case

There is no implied consent to money exchange between them.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court found the Defendants guilty of the instant facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence that the lower court sentenced the Defendants (for each of the four months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, three months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s confession in the court of first instance as to the assertion of mistake of facts alone is not likely to have the probative value or credibility of the confession, solely on the grounds that the confession in the court of appeal differs from the legal statement in the appellate court.

In determining the credibility of a confession, the credibility of a confession shall be determined in consideration of whether the contents of the confession are objectively reasonable, what is the motive or reason of the confession, what is the motive or reason of the confession, what is the background leading up to the confession, and what is not contrary to or contradictory to the confession among other evidence than the confessions (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2556, Apr. 29, 2010). In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is reasonable that the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, and there is no error that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant.

① At the first trial of the lower court, the Defendants were led to a confession of the facts charged in this case on the first trial date of the lower court, and denied it. However, the lower court acknowledged the facts charged in this case on a reasonable basis in the court of original instance.

There is no particular argument about the background leading up to the confession or the background leading up to the reversal of confession, and there is no reason to suspect the credibility of confession.

② The instant case.