The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

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 allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of the lower court’s fact-finding, and is merely an error in the determination of the lower court’s choice of evidence 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 exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the application of interpretation, fine, and both punishment provisions, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

The Supreme Court precedents asserted on the grounds of appeal are different from the instant case, and thus it is inappropriate to invoke the instant case.

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, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of the sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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