1. Since a final appeal is a follow-up trial on the judgment of the appellate court, matters which are not subject to a review in the appellate court are not subject to the scope of the trial in the final appeal, and thus, the grounds other than those which the defendant did not claim in the appellate court as the grounds for appeal or are subject to a review in

(2) According to the records, the Defendant appealed from the judgment of the first instance on July 14, 2005 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do2996, Jul. 14, 2005). According to the records, the Defendant asserted misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, along with the grounds for appeal, but withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the second trial date

In such a case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or finding facts concerning self-defense or excessive defense with respect to the fact of injury to the victim I.

The argument that there is an error of law in finding a fact in relation to the fact of injury to K of the victim is not a legitimate ground for appeal, because the defendant did not take the grounds for appeal or have been subject to an ex officio decision by the court below.

2. Examining the record, there is no illegality in the lower court’s trial proceeding that may obstruct the Defendant’s exercise of the right to defense.

The ground of appeal on this part is not accepted.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is reversed ex officio on the ground that there is a reason under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes, and it is justifiable in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.

There is no violation of law as argued in the Grounds for Appeal.

4. The argument that found a mistake on the circumstances affecting the sentencing is attributable to the assertion of unfair sentencing.

However, the Criminal Procedure Act.