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, based on its stated reasoning, rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal as to mistake of facts against which the instant facts charged were found guilty.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such judgment of the court below is merely an error of the judgment of the court of fact-finding 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 evidence duly admitted, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of the principle of free evaluation of evidence

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations on the basic facts of sentencing is the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, in this case where a fine is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

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