  In this paper we critique Keum-Bae Cho's proof that $\mathrm{P} \subsetneq
\mathrm{NP}$. This proof relates instances of 3-SAT to indistinguishable
binomial decision trees and claims that no polynomial-time algorithm can solve
3-SAT instances represented by these trees. We argue that their proof fails to
justify a crucial step, and so the proof does not establish that $\mathrm{P}
\subsetneq \mathrm{NP}$.
