1. According to Articles 370 and 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the appellate court did not open the court without the attendance of the defendant. However, according to Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, if the defendant does not appear in the court on the trial date of appellate trial, the date shall be set again, and if the defendant does not appear in the court on the new trial date without justifiable grounds, the court may render a judgment without the defendant's statement. However, in order for the defendant to make a judgment without the defendant's statement, the defendant needs not appear in the court without justifiable grounds after receiving a summons of the trial date

In addition, according to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, a notice service on a defendant may be made only when the dwelling, office, or present location of the defendant is unknown. In the event that the defendant's home phone number or mobile phone number is shown on the record, an attempt is made to confirm the place to be served with the above phone number and to regard it as the place to be served, and immediately issue a service by the method of public notice and make a judgment without the defendant's statement is not permitted as it violates Articles 63(1) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

This legal doctrine is likewise applicable in a case where the Defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the first instance against the judgment of the court, and the Defendant, despite being aware of the pending lawsuit, failed to report his residence to the court, and thus, failed to serve the court, thereby making a service by means of public notice delivery (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do3892, Jul. 12, 2007). 2. The record reveals the following facts.

(1) The Defendant filed an appeal against each of the judgment of the first instance in the instant case, and the lower court, on August 11, 2016, received the records of trial as the Busan Detention House where the Defendant was under guard, with respect to the Busan District Court 2016 No. 2848 case.