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 the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the first instance court, which found the Defendant guilty of the damage of locking devices as of May 2, 2012 among the facts charged in the instant case, was justifiable, and rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal for mistake of facts disputing this.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such judgment of the court below is merely an error of the judgment of the court below as to the selection and probative value of evidence belonging to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding, and even if examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the judgment below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle

In addition, since the supplementary appellate brief submitted by the defendant was filed after the lapse of the period for submitting the appellate brief, any ground newly asserted in the supplementary appellate brief beyond the scope of supplement in the grounds for appeal cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal

In addition, even though examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal, such as unspecifiedness in the facts charged, etc., even if the first instance court acknowledged the date and time of the crime differently without changing an indictment.

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