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). For the reasons stated in its reasoning, the lower court is justifiable in the first instance court which rejected the Defendant’s assertion asserting that the Defendant was not physically and mentally weak at the time of each of the crimes in this case, on the grounds that the lower court: (a) based on the exercise of tangible power to suppress the victims’ resistance or was recognized for the purpose of evading arrest with respect to the part of robbery, bodily injury, and robbery among the facts charged in this case, that the victims suffered injury or was injured;

The defendant did not accept the defendant's argument on the grounds of appeal.

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 err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of injury by robbery and robbery, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as

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