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). For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant delivered a motor vehicle to B for the purpose of securing the obligation of obligation and that the Defendant had B or K affix a written or sealed seal on the documents indicated in its holding and used it as a forgery, and rejected the Defendant’s allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing this, and found the Defendant guilty.

The ground of appeal that such a determination by the lower court is erroneous is that it argues the lower court’s fact-finding, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on evidence selection and probative value belonging to the free judgment by the 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 by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations

On the other hand, where the defendant applied for consolidation of pleadings, whether such consolidation belongs to the court's discretion.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the right to a trial or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, even if the court below did not hold a joint hearing with other cases alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.