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 stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the performance of the Defendant is recognized by making at least two unspecified persons dialogue with one unspecified person, and rejected the grounds for appeal on the misapprehension of the legal doctrine of the Defendant.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal to the effect that the facts that served as the basis of the judgment of the court of fact-finding are nothing more than denying the judgment of the court of fact-finding on the selection and probative value of evidence, and the reasoning of the judgment below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the public performance of the crime of defamation or exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, even in light

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