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 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 indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the grounds for appeal, such as misconception of facts on this point, on the ground that the Defendant was found to have obstructed the examination of the thesis and the conferment of degrees of D University graduate schools by fraudulent means, as stated in the judgment of the first instance.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court, and is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles, relevant legal principles as indicated in the lower judgment, and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the obstruction of business

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