The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Western District Court.

1. According to the records on the grounds of appeal, the defendant appealed against each judgment of the first instance, and asserted a misapprehension of the legal principles as to the rules on the reinforcement of confession, along with the grounds of appeal, along with the unfair sentencing, on the third trial of the lower court, and withdrawn the remaining grounds of appeal except the unfair

In such a case, the court below's argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the rules of reinforcement of confession does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the rules of reinforcement of confessions.

2. The reasoning of the judgment of ex officio judgment of conviction is that criminal facts, the summary of evidence, and the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes are clearly indicated (Article 323(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). In a case where any of the grounds of the judgment was omitted in whole in the grounds of the judgment while rendering a judgment of conviction, it constitutes a violation of the law that affected the conclusion of the judgment under Article 383 subparag. 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act and constitutes grounds for reversal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do3505, Jun. 25, 2009; 2010Do9151, Oct. 14, 2010). According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below reversed all of the judgment of first instance as to each of the judgment of first instance ex officio and determined to jointly deliberate each of the cases of the judgment of first instance, and omitted all of the points of criminal facts and evidence in all of the judgment. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending Article 383 subparag.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.