All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A of the facts charged, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of fraud and the joint principal offender

In addition, the argument that the court below erred in incomplete deliberation on the normal relation is the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, under 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 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 against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

2. The ground of appeal by Defendant B contains an error of incomplete deliberation as to the normal relationship between Defendant B and the lower court’s assertion of unfair sentencing.

However, as seen above, under Article 383 subparag. 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, and an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. As such, in this case where Defendant B was sentenced to a more minor sentence, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence is unfair is

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