업무방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. In a case where a defendant filed a claim for recovery of appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, which was affirmed without a defendant's statement pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and the defendant filed a claim for recovery of appeal and cited it, if such grounds include circumstances in which the defendant could not be present in the trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, it is reasonable to deem that there exist grounds for a request for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the grounds for appeal corresponding to "when a request for retrial has
Therefore, in the above case, the appellate court should examine whether there are grounds for the request for a retrial under Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and there are such grounds.
If recognized, the judgment of the first instance court should be reversed, and a new judgment should be rendered in accordance with the result of the new trial, by serving a duplicate of indictment, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). (b) According to the records of the judgment, the following facts are recognized.
(1) The original court served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons, etc. on the defendant by means of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., and sentenced the defendant to a judgment on November 25, 2015, after proceeding the trial in the absence
② On December 22, 2015, the Defendant submitted a written claim for the restoration of the right to appeal to the lower court. On January 12, 2016, the lower court recognized that the Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant, and rendered a decision on the restoration of the right to appeal.
In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the circumstances are that the Defendant was unaware of this fact by being served with a copy of the indictment, a writ of summons, etc.