사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too minor for the original judgment.
2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio.
According to the records, the first instance court served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons on the defendant by means of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and served the defendant with prison labor for four months after the defendant was absent; ② The public prosecutor only appealed the sentence on the ground of unfair sentencing, served a writ of summons, etc. by serving public notice prior to remand; and subsequently dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal; ③ the first instance judgment prior to remand became final and conclusive; ③ the defendant was arrested by execution of the judgment prior to remand; ③ the defendant filed a request for recovery of the right of appeal; ④ the Supreme Court rendered a request for recovery of the right of appeal; ④ the defendant was found guilty on the grounds that the first instance court and the second instance court prior to remand were not present before remand and the trial prior to remand, and thus the defendant was found guilty on the grounds of a request for retrial prior to remand.
The judgment of the court prior to the remand is reversed and the case is remanded to this court.
According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court below due to a cause not attributable to the defendant. Thus, the court below's judgment has a ground for a request for retrial under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which constitutes grounds for appeal under Article 361-5 subparagraph 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Therefore, this court shall proceed with a new litigation procedure by delivering a duplicate of indictment to the defendant and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015), and the judgment of the court below shall be maintained as it is.