A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. On April 22, 2015, even if the Defendant was served by publication of the notification of the receipt of the trial records by the court, it is evident that the Defendant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal within the period for submission of the written notification of the receipt of trial records (the Defendant filed the statement of grounds for appeal before June 5, 2015) is not indicated in the petition of appeal

B. However, pursuant to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, if the dwelling, office, or present address of the defendant is unknown, service by public notice may be made. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and Articles 18 and 19 of the Decree on Special Cases Concerning the 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 location of the defendant is not confirmed within six months after receipt of the report on the impossibility of delivery to the defendant, even though the request for investigation, issuance of a detention warrant, or other necessary measures was taken to identify the location of the

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.

(Supreme Court Decision 201Do1094 Decided May 13, 2011). According to the records, the Defendant appeared at the first trial date of the lower court on February 6, 2013, and sought the continuation of pleadings for the consolidation of additional cases. The lower court served a writ of summons for the second trial date to the address indicated in the indictment after the date, but did not serve as “the addressee’s unknown”, and the same was to the prosecution.