The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The facts of the criminal records of the defendant who is the basis for aggravation of repeated crimes do not constitute criminal facts, but merely constitute the reason for sentencing, even if not stated in the indictment, it can be tried and judged. Even if the applicable provisions for repeated crimes are not stated in the indictment, the court may, ex officio, punish the defendant as a repeated crime by applying them.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 71Do2004, Dec. 21, 1971; 2006Do3194, Jul. 27, 2006). On the grounds that the judgment of the first instance was omitted, the lower court reversed and sold all of the judgment of the first instance ex officio and applied Article 35 of the Criminal Act to the Defendant, on the grounds that the judgment of the first instance was omitted.

Examining such judgment of the court below in light of the aforementioned legal principles, there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on changes in indictment and aggravated punishment of repeated crimes, as otherwise 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.