All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of any statement in the supplemental appellate brief of Defendant A, which was not timely filed, to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief).

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that Defendant A was guilty of the charge of special assault by Defendant A included in the facts charged of special injury and each of the charges of fraud by Defendant A on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there was no error by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, without failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty of the charge of fraud on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the elements for establishing fraud and the criteria for determining whether the act

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the prosecutor’s appeal in light of the legal principles as indicated in the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted, and the record, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found the Defendants not guilty on the charges of special injury, by deeming that there is no proof of crime, and found the Defendants A guilty of special assault and violence included in the above charges, and found the Defendants A guilty on the charges of embezzlement, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free conviction in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of unlawful acquisition in

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by all participating Justices.