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 preparation of evidence and the 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 stated in its reasoning, the lower court recognized that the first instance judgment which found the Defendant guilty of both the parts concerning the forgery and exercise of securities and the exercise thereof, fraud, and breach of trust among the criminal facts in the first instance judgment is justifiable, and rejected the Defendant’s allegation of the grounds for appeal on this part.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts that form the basis of the judgment below. It is nothing more than denying the judgment of the court below 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 judgment below in light of the aforementioned legal principles and duly admitted evidence, the judgment of the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to a person who administers another's business, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules

The Supreme Court precedents cited on the grounds of appeal are different from the instant case, and thus are inappropriate to be invoked in the instant case.

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