The appeal is dismissed.

Of the summary of the evidence of the lower judgment, Nonparty I. of the indictment, “I.D. indictment” (for extra M and N).

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). The court below rejected the defendant's assertion to the effect that the defendant is guilty of the facts charged as modified at the court below on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the lower court’s fact-finding is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which is the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court appears to have partly erred in its judgment on the relationship between M and the Defendant. However, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of evidence judgment, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by omitting judgment, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and it is clear that there is error in the judgment of the court below in the summary of the evidence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.