Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, based on the reasons indicated in its reasoning,: (a) the Defendant acquired economic benefits by treating the victim D, and (b) raped the victim H

Recognizing that the first deliberation decision as set forth by the person is justifiable, the grounds for appeal claiming the misunderstanding of facts are rejected.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court. It is nothing more than an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even when examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the crime of conflict of interest, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle

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