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). On April 9, 2012, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined that: (a) the victim’s possession of the instant store cannot be deemed to have been finally terminated; and (b) the Defendant could have arbitrarily entered the instant store without being properly transferred from the victim; and (c) rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal as to mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine disputing this point

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such fact-finding by the court below is merely erroneous in the determination of the evidence and probative value belonging to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding. While examining the reasoning of the court below in light of the evidence duly admitted, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

In addition, the argument that the defendant's act constitutes a mistake in the law under Article 16 of the Criminal Code is asserted in the ground of appeal that the defendant's act is not a ground of appeal or that the court below is not a subject of judgment ex officio. Thus, there is no legitimate ground of appeal, and there is no violation of law in the judgment below

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