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 determined that the Defendant violated the duty of care as stated in the criminal facts of the first instance trial and that the victim’s death at the time of the instant accident is likely to have been predicted, and rejected the Defendant’s allegation in the grounds of appeal as to the mistake of facts and misapprehension

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the recognition of facts that served as the basis of such determination by the lower court, and it is nothing more than denying the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belongs 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 relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the predictability of the crime

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