Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. According to Article 63(1) of the ex officio determination of the Criminal Procedure Act, when the dwelling, office, or present location of the defendant is unknown, service by public notice may be made, and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and Article 19(1) of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provides that service by public notice shall be made only when the defendant's whereabouts are not confirmed until six months have passed since the receipt of the report, although the defendant's whereabouts were taken necessary measures to confirm the defendant's whereabouts, and in light of the above six-month period is the minimum period established to protect the defendant's right to trial and right to attack and defense, "when the report on impossible service was received" shall be strictly interpreted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4983, Nov. 14, 2003).

According to the records, on February 8, 2012, the Defendant filed an application for a formal trial with respect to the instant summary order (Seoul High Court Decision 201 High Court Decision 201Da12173), and the Defendant sent a writ of summons to the Defendant, but the lower court received a written report on the impossibility of delivery, which was not served on April 21, 2012, due to the absence of the text of each closure on March 23, 2012 and March 31, 2012, the address of each addressee is unknown, and on May 14, 2012, and the lower court ordered the Defendant to serve a service by public notice on May 31, 2012, and subsequently, sentenced the Defendant to a judgment on June 26, 2012, when the Defendant did not appear.

Therefore, the above decision of service by public notice was made on May 31, 2012, before six months elapse from March 23, 2012, which was received by the lower court.