The conviction in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to have a judge correct doubt that the facts charged are true, and if there is no such proof, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant (see Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006; 2005Do8675, etc.). Furthermore, the selection of evidence and probative value of evidence 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 neglected due care and supervision to prevent the violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act in relation to the relevant facts charged, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment of the first instance, which found the Defendant guilty, was reversed, and sentenced not guilty.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination as to the choice of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles and relevant legal principles and records, even though the reasoning of the lower judgment was partially inappropriate, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds

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