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 rejected the Defendant’s allegation in the grounds of appeal on mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the ground that the Defendant’s insult and defamation did not constitute a justifiable act or a ground for dismissal of illegality.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is nothing more than an error of the judgment of the court below on the selection and probative value of evidence, which actually belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court, as the purport of disputing such fact-finding by

In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the relevant legal doctrine as seen in the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds for

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, in this case where a fine has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable

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