The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined. The postponement of the sentencing date notified belongs to the court's discretion. Thus, even if the court below rejected the request for postponement of the sentencing date and rendered a judgment, it cannot be deemed that it erred by infringing the defendant's right to defense and the right to counsel

(see Supreme Court Decision 2018Do20582, Feb. 28, 2019). Whether to resume closed pleadings belongs to the court’s discretion. As such, even if the lower court did not resume closed pleadings for additional pleadings by a private defense counsel appointed after the closing of pleadings, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s defense right and defense counsel’s right to defense and the right to defense counsel are infringed on in the trial proceedings of the court below, which rendered a decision without accepting an application for postponement of the pronouncement date of a private defense counsel appointed after the closing of argument in the court below.

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