The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for up to eight months) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the records, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the court of original judgment served a copy of the 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 eight months of imprisonment with prison labor, while the defendant was absent.

Accordingly, the defendant claimed that he was unaware of the fact that he was sentenced due to his failure to receive a copy, etc. of indictment when he filed a petition for recovery of his right of appeal on December 3, 2018. The court below recognized that the defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to him, and recognized that the defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to him, and recognized on December 14, 2018, and rendered a decision to recover his right of appeal

According to this, it is recognized that there are grounds for a request for retrial under Article 23-2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings because the defendant was not responsible for failing to attend the trial of the court below, and this constitutes "when there are grounds for request for retrial" under Article 361-5

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). Therefore, this Court has to proceed with new litigation procedures and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial by delivering a copy, etc. of indictment to the Defendant. As such, the lower judgment was unable to be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

[Discied Reasons for the judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.