[2] The case holding that it is difficult to see that the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts was clearly withdrawn among the grounds for appeal in light of the fact that the defense counsel or the defendant did not explicitly withdraw the argument of misunderstanding

[3] In a case where the appellate court rejected a mistake of facts on the grounds of unfair sentencing on the sole ground of unfair sentencing, and did not decide on the assertion of mistake and dismissed the appeal on the grounds of mistake of facts, and the defendant appealed on the grounds of mistake of facts, the case holding that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles or omission of judgment on the grounds of mistake of facts on the grounds of the defendant's assertion in the above grounds of appeal, although it can be deemed that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to withdrawal of grounds of appeal

A person who has filed an appellate brief may withdraw part of the grounds for appeal stated in the appellate brief on the court date, but if the grounds for appeal are withdrawn, it may be subject to restrictions which may not be deemed as the grounds for appeal again. Thus, the withdrawal of the grounds for appeal shall be clearly made (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6834, Feb. 26, 2003, etc.).

According to the records, it is evident that the defendant has asserted in the statement of grounds of appeal that there was a mistake of facts as to the facts charged No. 2, along with the grounds of appeal. On the second trial of the court below, the defendant stated that the grounds of appeal are unreasonable, and the defendant also stated that they are the same as the counsel's opinion, and the court below rejected the defendant's grounds of appeal on the sole ground of unfair sentencing, and dismissed the defendant's appeal without

In light of the legal principles as to withdrawal of the grounds for appeal as seen earlier and the fact that either a defense counsel or the defendant has not explicitly withdrawn the assertion of mistake in the trial process of the original instance, it is difficult to view that the defendant clearly withdrawn the allegation of mistake

On the other hand, while the defendant cited a mistake of facts in the grounds of appeal, in this case where a defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for less than 10 years, mistake of facts cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal, and the grounds of appeal lawfully withdrawn at the original court cannot be considered as the grounds of appeal again. Thus, the defendant's assertion in the grounds of appeal as above may include the court below's misapprehension of legal principles as to withdrawal of the grounds of appeal, or omission of judgment as to

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, since the person who acquired the automobile of this case driving by the defendant is the defendant, there is no error of misconception of facts in the judgment below, and there is no error of misapprehension of legal principles or omission of judgment as to the withdrawal of grounds for appeal

In addition, in this case where imprisonment for less than 10 years is imposed on the defendant, unreasonable sentencing cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

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

Justices Cha Han-sung (Presiding Justice)