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 determined that ① the Defendant was aware of the alleged facts by the Defendant as false facts, and the Defendant was the purpose of slandering the victim, and ② Article 310 of the Criminal Act on the prevention of illegality is not applicable to the defamation of false facts through information and communications networks, and rejected the allegation of the grounds for appeal as to mistake and misapprehension of legal principles.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such fact-finding by the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which substantially belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the allegation of facts against the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) and false perception, defamation, intent and judgment to defame a person, and the grounds for denying illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence by violating logical and empirical rules

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