All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court collected each amount of money from the Defendants in accordance with Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment (hereinafter “Regulation of Criminal Proceeds Concealment”) in determining the Defendants guilty of charges.

Examining the record in accordance with the relevant legal doctrine, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on collection under the Regulation on Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act

The argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the determination of punishment constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, 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 ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the Defendants, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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