All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have maintained the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A of the facts charged, for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on intentional murder or physical and mental weakness.

In addition, 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 10 years is declared, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and the defendant voluntarily surrendered.

Even if self-denunciations, the court does not necessarily have to reduce or exempt the punishment for self-denunciations.

Therefore, the argument that the court below did not reduce self-denunciation or that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where the defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment for less than 10 years.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant E’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable in maintaining the first instance judgment convicting Defendant E of the facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there was no error by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the defense of a political party.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a minor sentence is imposed against Defendant E, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair 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.