도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
except that, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (eight months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. We examine the defendant's grounds for appeal ex officio prior to the judgment
Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Articles 18(2) and (3) and 19(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act provide that service by public notice shall be made only when the whereabouts of the defendant is not confirmed even though necessary measures are taken to confirm the whereabouts of the defendant, service by public notice after six months from the date on which the report on the impossibility of service was received when the location of the defendant was not confirmed. Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that service by public notice may be
Therefore, in the event that the actual residence, place of work, office phone number, mobile phone number, etc. of the accused appears on the record, an attempt shall be made to deliver them to such actual residence, etc., or to confirm the place of service by contact with telephone numbers, etc., and it is not allowed to serve them by publication without taking such measures and render a judgment without the accused’s statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do6762, Jul. 28, 2011). The following facts are recognized according to the records of this case.
① The court of the lower court served documents, such as a copy of the indictment, Defendant’s summons, etc., with the “N” which is the dwelling of the Defendant as stated in the indictment, and the Defendant did not appear on the first day of September 4, 2014, while serving the said documents on August 6, 2014.
② The Defendant’s writ of summons relating to the second trial date held on October 7, 2014 and the third trial date held on October 21, 2014, which was held on October 21, 2014, became impossible to serve as a result of the absence of documents on September 15, 2014 and October 15, 2014, respectively.
On October 2, 2014 and October 7, 201, the court of the court below puts on the phone number of the defendant as stated in the indictment.