사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Ex officio Judgment Proceedings; Articles 18(2) and (3) and 19(1) of the Rules on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits, when the location of the defendant is not verified even though the defendant took necessary measures to identify the location of the defendant, service on the defendant shall be made by means of serving public notice. Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that service on the defendant may be made by serving public notice only when the dwelling, office, or present location of the defendant is unknown.
Since other contact numbers of the defendant appear on the record, it should be viewed that the attempt is made to identify the place where the defendant will receive the service by contact with the contact address, and it is not allowed to serve the service by the method of public disclosure immediately without any such contact address and make a judgment without the defendant's statement (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do662, Jul. 28, 201). According to the records, the prosecutor's examination protocol against the defendant shows that there is a different telephone number (O) from the defendant's workplace address (No. 102 Dong 505, Jun. 28, 2011). Thus, the court below should have conducted the service of the above address or confirmed the place where the defendant will receive the service by contact with the above telephone number, but the court below did not take such measures and did not confirm whether the defendant's address is the defendant.
decently, the service by the method of public notice was made and the judgment was made without the defendant's statement.
Such a measure of the lower court is unlawful because it violates the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and the special rules on the promotion of legal proceedings.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.
3. The judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for reversal of authority.