Confidence estimation aiming to evaluate output trustability is crucial for the application of large language models (LLM), especially the black-box ones. Existing confidence estimation of LLM is typically not calibrated due to the overconfidence of LLM on its generated incorrect answers. Existing approaches addressing the overconfidence issue are hindered by a significant limitation that they merely consider the confidence of one answer generated by LLM. To tackle this limitation, we propose a novel paradigm that thoroughly evaluates the trustability of multiple candidate answers to mitigate the overconfidence on incorrect answers. Building upon this paradigm, we introduce a two-step framework, which firstly instructs LLM to reflect and provide justifications for each answer, and then aggregates the justifications for comprehensive confidence estimation. This framework can be integrated with existing confidence estimation approaches for superior calibration. Experimental results on six datasets of three tasks demonstrate the rationality and effectiveness of the proposed framework.