The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court: (a) the Defendant, as a certified broker operating the “D real estate office”, had a third party engage in brokerage business using his name, or transferred or lent his certificate of qualification as a certified broker; (b) the lower court, based on the Defendant’s name, allowed E to engage in brokerage business of marina acquisition contracts

Based on the judgment, this part of the charges against the defendant was found guilty.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the lending of the certificate of a certified brokerage agent

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