업무방해
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and even if the judgment of the court below is found guilty of domestic affairs, the punishment (1.5 million won) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant prior to the judgment.
According to the records, the court of original judgment served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons of summary order on the method of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits, and sentenced a judgment by conducting a trial in the absence of the defendant. The defendant filed an appeal and filed a request for recovery of the right of appeal, and the court can recognize the fact that the defendant made a request for recovery of the right of appeal. According to the above facts of recognition, there are grounds for request for retrial under Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits for the reason that
Therefore, this court shall proceed with a new litigation procedure, such as serving a duplicate of indictment on the defendant, and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial, and in this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2014Do17252, Jun. 25, 2015; 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015): Provided, That the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of the facts is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case, since the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of the facts is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case, and the records are examined closely by comparing the evidence duly adopted by the court through the examination of evidence, and the judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is unfair since there is a ground for reversal as above.