The finding of guilt in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such proof, the conviction cannot be judged even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823 Decided August 21, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675 Decided March 9, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, the selection of evidence and the probative value of evidence, which are based 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 focused on the Defendant’s primary charge that “the Defendant received money and valuables for a specific purpose,” and found the Defendant not guilty on the charge of the ancillary charge of the instant case, on the grounds that the Defendant’s act can be seen as “the network” with the focus on the two points of view, and whether there was “the Defendant’s intention” or “the Defendant’s intentional act,” it is difficult to conclude that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there was no reasonable doubt.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is merely an error of the judgment of the court below on the selection and probative value of evidence, which 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 principles and records, 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.

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