특수절도
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio the legality of the decision of service of public notice by the court below.
A. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 18(2) and (3) and Article 19(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act provide that service on the accused shall be made by means of service on public notice if the whereabouts of the accused is not confirmed even though the accused took necessary measures to confirm the whereabouts of the accused, and that service on the accused may be made only when the dwelling, office, or present whereabouts of the accused cannot be identified.
Inasmuch as other contact details of the defendant appear on the record, it should be viewed that the defendant's attempt to confirm the place to contact with the contact address and to regard the place to be served, and it is not allowed to serve the defendant as soon as a public notice is served without taking such measures and make a judgment without the defendant's statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do3892, Jul. 12, 2007; 201Do6762, Jul. 28, 2011). (b) According to the records, the court of original judgment tried to serve the defendant with a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons of the defendant, etc. as the address stated in the indictment, "Songyang-gu, Yangyang-gu," which is the resident registration address and resident registration address on the resident registration of the defendant, and then made a decision to serve the public notice thereafter.
(c)
In doing so, it can be recognized that the contact information of the defendant is written in J (J) in the police interrogation protocol (25th page of the investigation record) against the defendant.
(d)
In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court attempted to contact with the contact point recorded in the police interrogation protocol prior to rendering a decision to serve public notice.
Although they did not take such measures, it is concluded that the whereabouts of the accused cannot be confirmed immediately without taking such measures.