The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of this case, the court of original judgment determines that the service of the defendant to the defendant on October 11, 2017, when the duplicate, etc. of indictment is not served on the defendant, shall be made public and shall be made by means of service on public notice. On November 9, 2017, when the defendant did not appear in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., the court of original judgment rendered an examination of evidence on November 23, 2017, when the court of original judgment sentenced the defendant to six months in prison on November 23, 2017, when the above judgment became final and conclusive by the appeal period, and thereafter, the defendant filed a claim for recovery of the right to appeal against the above judgment, and it can be recognized that the defendant was unable

Therefore, there is no reason to return to the court below's failure to attend the trial and there is a reason to request a retrial under Special Act on the Promotion of Litigation, etc.

Recognizing this, this Court has completed a new litigation procedure, such as serving a copy of indictment on the accused, and rendered a new judgment according to the result of a new trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do17252, Jun. 25, 2015). In this respect, the judgment of the court below became impossible to maintain as it is.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Grounds for another judgment】 The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court is to delete the “1. The Police Examination Protocol against the Defendant” in the main text of the evidence indicated in the judgment of the court below, and “1. The Defendant’s Criminal Examination Protocol” in the main text of the evidence indicated in the judgment of the court below is to delete the “2016 Height 2149, 2016 Height 2455, 2576.