The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and ten months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one year and ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. On December 2, 2016, the lower court determined that the case No. 7220 of the lower court’s 2016 senior 2016 senior 5577 was consolidated and tried.

The lower court determined on August 25, 2017 that the Defendant was unable to serve a copy, etc. of the indictment in the Suwon District Court 2016 High Court 7220, which was the Defendant’s unknown whereabouts, and determined on October 12, 2017 that the service of the Defendant was made by means of public notice, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with labor for one year and ten months on October 26, 2017, when the Defendant did not appear pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to appear in the trial proceedings on the case of Suwon District Court 2016 High Order 7220 and there is no reason to request a retrial due to the lack of any reason to return to the court below.

Accordingly, this Court revoked the public notice service decision and served a copy of indictment again, and then newly proceeded with all the trial proceedings including the examination of evidence.

In doing so, each crime of Suwon District Court 2016 High Court 7220 High Court 201 High Court 2016 High Court 557 High Court 201 High Court 2016 High Court 201 High Court 557 High Court is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in its entirety.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio as above. Thus, the judgment below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act after omitting judgment on the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Court” 【The facts constituting a crime and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court and the summary of the evidence are excluded from adding “the defendant’s oral testimony at the trial court” to “a summary of evidence”.