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 suspicion of guilt against the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). Furthermore, the selection of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted as 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, proven that there was no reasonable doubt as to the part of defamation caused by telephone conversations among the facts charged of this case without having a reasonable doubt.

Recognizing that the first deliberation decision, which was deemed insufficient to view, was justifiable, the grounds for appeal as to the prosecutor’s mistake of facts were rejected.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing such determination of facts by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which substantially belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the above legal doctrine and the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the free evaluation principle against logical

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