In order for the defendant to render a judgment without the defendant's statement pursuant to Article 365 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is necessary that the defendant was served with a summons of lawful trial date and did not go on the trial date without any justifiable reason two times. The justifiable reason here refers to the reason why there is no error by the defendant and no responsibility is attributable to him/her (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 62Do70, Jun. 14, 1962; 2010Do5410, Jun. 24, 2011). In light of the records, the court below's measures are justifiable in accordance with the above legal principles, and the judgment of the court below which rendered a decision after the closure of pleadings without the defendant's attendance is justifiable, and there is a violation of Article 365 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act as asserted in the grounds for appeal.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the argument in the grounds of appeal that the court below did not properly have the assistance of counsel or infringed the defendant's right to a fair trial cannot be accepted in light of the progress of the trial by the court below as revealed in the record.

B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free conviction or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.