If the appellate court accepts part of the grounds for appeal specified in the statement of reasons for appeal and reverses the first instance judgment and renders a self-determination thereof, the validity of the remaining grounds for appeal asserted by the appellant shall be deemed to have been determined in the process of a trial and determination as a fact-finding court, and separately, it did not specify

failure to make any judgment;

It does not mean that it is not (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4517, Nov. 13, 2008). According to the records, the lower court has a ground for requesting a retrial under Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings in the judgment of the first instance.

In light of the foregoing, the judgment of the first instance court is reversed, and the facts that the Defendant was sentenced to punishment after pleading are revealed. Thus, the lower court did not separately determine the Defendant’s grounds for appeal for unfair sentencing

There is an error of omission in the judgment on the grounds of appeal, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

Other grounds of appeal shall not fall under legitimate grounds of appeal prescribed in Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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