사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment) is unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.
A. According to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 19(1) of the Enforcement Rule thereof, even though the Defendant took necessary measures to identify the location of the Defendant, the method of service by publication is determined only when the Defendant’s location was not confirmed by six months after the receipt of the Defendant’s report.
B. The record reveals the following facts.
① The Defendant appeared on the first trial date of the lower judgment, and stated that his residence is called Gwangju Southern-gu AC 302 (hereinafter “instant domicile”).
The lower court concluded the pleadings on the date of the first public trial, and designated the date of pronouncement on May 1, 2015.
② The Defendant was absent on the above sentencing date.
The court of original judgment issued a writ of arrest to the defendant on the same day, and the date of sentence was postponed on May 15, 2015.
The Defendant was not present even on May 29, 2015, May 15, 2015, the date of the postponed order, which was the date of May 15, 2015, which was the date of the postponed order. The Defendant’s writ of summons as to the date of each postponed order was impossible to be served due to the absence of closure on May 8, 2015, May 11, 2015, and May 21, 2015.
③ The warrant of arrest issued by the lower court on May 1, 2015 was impossible to be executed on May 29, 2015, as the ground that “a warrant of arrest issued on May 1, 2015, which was sent to the dwelling place of several times, but failed to discover the Defendant.”
On June 1, 2015, the court of original judgment issued a detention warrant and requested the release of the defendant, and the above detention warrant was not executed on December 1, 2015 and returned.
④ On August 25, 2015, the lower court ordered the head of the Gwangju Southern Police Station having jurisdiction over the domicile of the instant case to commission the detection of the location of the Defendant, and on October 5, 2015, the lower court at the domicile of the instant case.