The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The defendant above.

A. The Defendant did not interfere with A’s residence intrusion and theft as described in Article 1-b of the facts charged in the 2014 Highest 486 Case No. 1-2, and in the case of paragraph (3) of the said facts charged, the Defendant stolen KRW 15,000, not KRW 300,000, not KRW 300.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The court below did not have an opportunity to attend the court below's decision because the defendant's summons was not served.

2. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s location could not be confirmed even after six months have passed since the receipt of a report on the failure to serve on the Defendant pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (the grounds for the request for a retrial) and determined to serve the notice, and sentenced the Defendant to ten months in imprisonment with labor without a statement of the Defendant

In regard to the judgment of the first instance, which was pronounced guilty without a defendant's statement pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, where the defendant filed a petition for recovery of appeal on the grounds that the defendant or his/her representative could not file an appeal within the period for filing an appeal due to a cause not attributable to him/her without a request for reexamination under the provisions of reexamination, and where the grounds for appeal include circumstances in which the defendant could not attend the trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, it is reasonable to deem that the grounds for appeal corresponding to "when a cause for requesting a retrial exists" under Article 361-5 subparagraph 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act is asserted by

Therefore, the appellate court should examine whether there are grounds for the request for a retrial under the provisions of the retrial, and there are grounds for the appeal.

If it is recognized, the judgment of the first instance court should be reversed, and the new trial results should be ruled again according to the new trial results, such as serving a copy, etc. of indictment (Supreme Court Decision 201 November 26, 2015).