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 selection of evidence and 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 act of a defendant, the representative of the victim company, by having the victim company enter into the instant joint and several guarantee contract and perform the said joint and several guarantee obligation constitutes an act of violating the duty of breach of trust, and rejected the grounds for appeal as to

The ground of appeal, which is erroneous in the judgment of the court below, is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the court below. It is nothing more than erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle on the selection and probative value of evidence belonging to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding. In addition, even when examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the aforementioned legal principles and relevant legal principles as stated in the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted, the judgment of the court below did not exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principle on the establishment

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