The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to the records on grounds of retrial, the lower court may recognize the fact that, on September 18, 2018, the Defendant served a writ of summons, etc. of the Defendant by public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings on the ground that the whereabouts of the Defendant cannot be confirmed after the delivery of a duplicate of indictment and served the Defendant on the grounds that he/she was unable to confirm the whereabouts of the Defendant, and proceeded with the examination on April 20, 2018 without the Defendant’s absence. The Defendant filed an appeal along with the petition for recovery of his/her right of appeal on June 8, 2018, and the lower court dismissed the petition for recovery of his/her right of appeal, but the lower court decided to recover the Defendant’

According to this, since the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court below due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, there are grounds for request for retrial under Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and this court has conducted a new litigation procedure such as delivering a copy of indictment to the defendant. Thus, the judgment

B. In the trial of the amendment of the indictment, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment as stated in paragraphs 2 and 4 of the facts charged, and this court permitted it and changed the subject of the trial.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below can not be maintained.

3. 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 reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Punishment of the crime

1. The defendant around 03:30 on June 28, 2016, "D operated by the first floor victim C under Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building B."