All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. According to the records on Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, Defendant A appealed on the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below goes beyond the inherent limit of sentencing discretion and violates the fundamental contents of the principle of balance of punishment and the principle of responsibility in violation of Article 51 of the Criminal Act is ultimately an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years

In this case where the above defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on Defendant F’s ground of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s determination that the instant facts charged against Defendant F was found guilty on the grounds indicated in its reasoning is justifiable to have confiscated the building among the instant real estate.

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 against logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the business operation and confiscation of a crime of violating Article 19(2)1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the prosecutor’s ground of appeal against Defendant F, in light of the record, the lower court is among the instant real estate provided for sexual traffic for reasons indicated in its reasoning.