The conviction in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to have a judge correct doubt as to the facts charged, and if there is no such proof, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's conviction, the conviction cannot be judged as guilty (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence, which is based 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 indicated in its reasoning, acknowledged that the Defendants' act constitutes a justifiable act as provided in Article 20 of the Criminal Act or a self-help act as provided in Article 23(1) of the Criminal Act, and rejected the prosecutor's allegation of the grounds for appeal as to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court that led to such determination. It is nothing more than denying the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence belonging to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on obstruction of business operations, acts of political party, and act of self-help, or by exceeding the bounds of free

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