도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
Although the defendant did not submit a statement of grounds for appeal within the due period for submission of the grounds for appeal, the defendant's appeal shall not be dismissed by decision on the ground that the judgment below ex officio
2. Ex officio determination
A. According to the records, the defendant, on May 18, 2009, filed a request for recovery of the right to request a formal trial against the summary order of this court No. 2008 high-level 22004 by this court on May 26, 2009, and received a notice of the decision of acceptance on May 26, 2009 in a lump sum as to each of the first and second public trial dates. The defendant was not present on the first public trial date of the court below. The defendant was not present on the first public trial date of the court below. The summons of the second public trial date was not served on the second public trial date, and the defendant was not present on the second public trial date of the previous public trial date of the court below, and the court below can recognize the fact that the defendant did not appear on the second public trial date of the previous public trial under Articles 458(2) and 365(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
B. According to Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 458 of the same Act, if a defendant who is dissatisfied with a summary order and has requested a formal trial fails to appear in the court on the date of the formal trial procedure, the date shall be fixed again, and if the defendant fails to appear in the court on the new date without justifiable grounds, he/she may render a judgment without a statement of the defendant. This is a kind of restrictive provision which considers that he/she gives up his/her right of pleading on the merits by his/her neglect to the defendant. Thus, if he/she intends to assume the responsibility for the second absence on two occasions, he/she need not appear in the court without justifiable grounds after receiving a writ of legitimate court date over two times (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do326, Apr. 12, 2002).