Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. According to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for ex officio determination, if the dwelling, office, or present address of the defendant is unknown, service by public notice may be made, and Articles 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Articles 18 and 19 of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings do not correspond to death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years in the trial of the first instance, if the whereabouts of the defendant is not verified within six months after receipt of the report on impossibility of service by public notice, the service on the defendant shall be made by public notice.

Therefore, if the defendant's office telephone number or mobile phone number appears on the record, it is necessary to have an attempt to contact the above telephone number with the location of service and to see the place of service, and to promptly serve by public notice without taking such measures is in violation of Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do1094 Decided May 13, 201, etc.). However, although the Defendant changed his/her address on March 3, 2014 to “Seoul Gwanak-guD” and reported it on March 10, 2014 and on June 18, 2014, the lower court entrusted the service of general delivery, execution officer, and data investigation, etc. to another address where it appears that the above address is a serviceable address in the telephone call with a court employee on March 10, 2014, the Defendant sent the writ of summons to the above address on March 10, 2014, and did not serve the said address as an unknown address.