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). The lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, convicted all of the facts charged in the instant case.

The grounds of appeal are the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court, and it is merely erroneous for the lower court’s determination on the selection of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s determination did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Meanwhile, the argument that there was an error of not recognizing mental disorder among the grounds for appeal is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the defendant asserts that it was based on appeal or that the court below was not subject to judgment ex officio.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, a final appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, the argument that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for final appeal.

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