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 reasons stated in its reasoning, the lower court is reasonable to regard Article 86(6) of the Act on Non-Act on Non-existence of Residential and Residential Environments, excluding resident registration numbers, as a provision punishing union executives who do not comply with the request for reproduction of association members on the matters on the register of union members. Recognizing that the said provision cannot be deemed as contrary to the principle of clarity,

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the determination of the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which substantially belongs 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 regarding interpretation of Article 81(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environment Environments, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

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