The Defendant’s argument in the grounds of appeal is that the lower court convicted the Defendant by making an erroneous fact-finding although the Defendant did not prepare or attach the documents of this case and the content stated in the above documents are not false, and thus, the lower court’s judgment is unlawful.

However, the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence conducted on the premise thereof are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

Even if examining the reasons in light of the record, the court below cannot find out the reasons that the court below exceeded the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the above argument in the grounds of appeal is merely to criticize matters falling under the exclusive right of the court of original judgment, and it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the method of sentencing review and sentencing determination by infringing on the fundamental contents of the principle of balance of punishment or the principle of responsibility in determining the punishment against the defendant constitutes an argument of unfair sentencing.

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may be filed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is sentenced. Thus, in this case where a fine is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

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