1. Where it is deemed that there exist grounds for request for retrial only for some of the facts constituting an indivisible crime at a final and conclusive judgment convicting of several concurrent crimes, the entire judgment is deemed to have been rendered, and it is inevitable to make a decision on commencing retrial. However, as to the facts constituting an offense for which the nature of the review system, which does not have any grounds for retrial, is limited to including the part of the decision on commencing retrial formally in the subject matter of adjudication, the retrial court cannot re-examine the said part and reverse the conviction. However, since the new judgment should impose a new punishment on that part, it is only possible to review only to the extent necessary for sentencing (see Supreme Court Decisions 96Do477, Jun. 14, 1996; 201Do1239, Jul. 13, 201; 2001Do1679, supra, the Seoul High Court rendered a new judgment on the ground that the Defendant violated the Act on the Punishment of Violences and the Emergency Decree No. 97, Jun. 16, 1978).