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.

(1) On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the former part of Article 1 subparag. 13 (hereinafter “instant provision”) of the former Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11401, Mar. 21, 2012; hereinafter the same) does not contravene the principle of clarity, and (2) the Defendant’s act of attaching the Defendant’s posters, like the crime of the first instance court, constitutes the constituent elements of the instant provision, and (3) the Defendant’s act of attaching the posters, as indicated in its reasoning, is deemed justifiable, in full view of the circumstances in its holding, including the circumstance that the Defendant had been holding more than 30 meters of the 150 masters.

(b) have the reasonableness of the method or means;

In addition to the attachment of the instant posters without the consent of the housing owner, etc., there seems to have been no other means or methods capable of realizing the Defendant’s freedom of artistic and political expression, and thus, it is not recognized as a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules, and thus, (4) the Defendant did not accept the Defendant’s allegation in the grounds of appeal on the mistake of facts

Of the grounds of appeal, the part concerning the argument that the lower court’s determination on the circumstances based on the judgment is nothing more than an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which actually belongs to the free judgment

In addition, the reasoning of the judgment below is based on the relevant legal principles and evidence duly adopted.