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 sentence of the lower court’s sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment) as to the summary of the grounds for appeal is so unreasonable that it is too large that it is unfair (the contents stated in the application for recovery of the right of appeal in an unfair claim for sentencing). 2. Determination ex officio;

A. On November 20, 2015, the lower court served a copy, etc. of the indictment on the method of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Litigation Promotion”) on the grounds that the whereabouts of the Defendant cannot be identified, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months on November 20, 2015.

2) After the period of appeal against the lower judgment was expired, the Defendant filed a petition for recovery of the right of appeal by asserting that he was not aware of the fact that the public prosecution was instituted on the grounds that the Defendant was not served with a copy of the indictment, etc.

3) On December 23, 2015, the court rendered a decision to recover the defendant's right to appeal by recognizing that the defendant's failure to appeal within the appeal period was caused by a cause not attributable to the defendant.

B. The ground for appeal for the right of appeal filed by the defendant is alleged to have a ground for the request for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Litigation Promotion Act, and it is reasonable to deem that the ground for appeal corresponding to "when there is a ground for request for retrial" under Article 361-5 (1) 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act is alleged. Even according to the record, there is no reason for the request for retrial under the provisions of the Litigation Promotion Act because the defendant was unable to appear in the trial

Recognized.

The appellate court, as an appellate court, shall proceed with new litigation procedures, such as delivering a copy of indictment, etc. again to the defendant, reverse the judgment below and render a new judgment in accordance with the result of a new trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained further.

3. Conclusion