A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Grounds for reversal 1: According to the records of the judgment by service by public notice, the court of the original instance served a copy of indictment and a writ of summons by public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and sentenced the defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and the defendant stated that he was unaware of the fact that the trial of the first instance was progress by public notice when he requested the recovery of the right of appeal against the judgment of the final and conclusive judgment by public notice.

Thus, the defendant's failure to attend the trial of the court below is recognized as the grounds for the request for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings due to the lack of causes attributable to the defendant in the trial of the court below. Accordingly, this court shall proceed with new litigation procedures, such as serving the defendant with a duplicate of indictment, and render a new judgment according to the result of new trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26,

B. Grounds for destruction 2: According to the necessary defense record, the court below acknowledged that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case under the circumstances where the defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions due to the stimulative disorder of the habitual disorder, etc.

Therefore, although the defendant in this case was suspected of mental disorder and was unable to revise or deliberate without a defense counsel pursuant to Article 282 and Article 33 (1) 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the court below, without a defense counsel, proceeded with the trial date without a defense counsel for the defendant who is not a defense counsel, examined the summary of the prosecution, the statement of evidence examination, and the examination of evidence, and found the judgment as it is based on evidence of conviction. Thus, the judgment of the court below is necessary for the defense counsel.