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 acknowledged that the Defendant posted a letter on the Internet website as stated in the facts charged, and determined that the Defendant’s act of transmitting e-mail and text messages does not constitute self-defense, and rejected the Defendant’s allegation of grounds for appeal as to mistake of facts and misapprehension

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such fact-finding and judgment by the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination of evidence and probative value, which belong 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 doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on self-defense, or failing

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. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

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