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). The lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, determined that all criminal facts of violating the Food Sanitation Act as indicated in the lower judgment are guilty.

The grounds of appeal disputing this fact-finding by the lower court are merely grounds for the lower court’s judgment on the selection of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the lower court as a fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence, contrary

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, the argument that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for final appeal.

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