The modification of the indictment pursuant to Article 298 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be permitted to the extent that it does not harm the identity of the facts charged, unless there are special circumstances, such as the occurrence of the grounds for the modification of the indictment after the closing of pleadings. The same does not apply to the case where the application for the modification of indictment is filed by the court after the closing of the hearings of the legitimate public trial and the prosecutor applied for the modification of indictment after the closing of the hearings of the public trial.

In light of the above legal principles and records, in this case, where the prosecutor submitted an application for resumption of pleadings and an application for modification of a bill of indictment after closing the pleadings and designating the sentencing date, the court below did not permit the resumption of pleadings and modification of a bill of indictment, but did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the permission for modification of a bill of indictment, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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