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). On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal for misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, on the grounds that: (a) the Defendant’s act of preparing and exercising a false guarantee prescribed in Article 13 of the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration,

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such a judgment of the court below is merely an error of the judgment of the court below on the selection and probative value of evidence belonging to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding.

In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the relevant legal principles as well as the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine prescribed in the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical

In addition, pursuant to 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a fine is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

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