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 court below, based on its stated reasoning, rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal for erroneous determination of facts, on the ground that the defendant raised money from the victim P.

The ground of appeal disputing such fact-finding by the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the evidence selection and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

In addition, even when 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 by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the ground of appeal disputing the fact-finding of M among the grounds of appeal is not a legitimate ground of appeal as stipulated in Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as the grounds of appeal or that the court below did not consider it

In addition, under 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 not less 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 amount of punishment is unreasonable

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