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 indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal for misconception of facts on the ground that the Defendants conspired and embezzled funds owned by the victim company, which was in the occupational custody, with the intent of unlawful acquisition.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is merely an error in the judgment of the court below as to the choice of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding.

In addition, even after examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the intent of unlawful acquisition of occupational embezzlement or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

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