정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the penalty (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, pursuant to Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 458 of the same Act, where the defendant who has requested a formal trial against a summary order fails to appear in the court on the trial date of the formal trial procedure, the date shall be fixed again, and where the defendant fails to appear in the court on the trial date again designated without justifiable grounds, he may be judged without the defendant's statement. Since a kind of punitive provision which considers that the defendant has waived his right to pleading on the merits due to the defendant's neglect to appear in court is a kind of punishment provision which considers that he shall have waived his right to pleading on the merits, if he
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do326 Decided April 12, 2002, etc.). Meanwhile, according to Article 267-2(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 124-2 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the presiding judge may set a number of court dates en bloc, but in this case, he/she has to hear the opinions of the defendant or his/her defense counsel.
According to the records, the defendant filed a request for formal trial with respect to a summary order issued on September 7, 2012 with the Jung-gu District Court Decision 2012 High Court Decision 11446, and received a notice from the above court en bloc of the first trial date ( October 25, 2012) and the second trial date ( November 14:30, 2012) and the second trial date ( November 8, 2012). ② The above court did not notify the defendant of the second trial date as the defendant was absent on the first trial date, ③ the defendant did not appear on the second trial date, ③ the defendant was not present on the second trial date, and the above court was punished while rendering a substitute trial to the defendant pursuant to Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the defendant was absent on two consecutive occasions.