The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding and unreasonable sentencing)

A. There is no fact that there was a mistake of fact.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2,00,000 and the cost of lawsuit) is too unreasonable.

The judgment ex officio is examined prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the records of this case, the defendant appeared on September 18, 2018 at the first trial date of the court below, but was not present on the second trial date of the court below on November 2, 2018. On November 30, 2019, although he appeared on the third trial date of the court below on November 30, 2019, he could not be said to have failed to appear on two consecutive occasions since he was absent on the fourth trial date of the court below on January 29, 2019. The court below revised the evidence by amendment without the attendance of the defendant pursuant to Articles 365 and 458(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the fourth trial date of the court below, and decided on the trial date of March 15, 2019 after closing pleadings and closing pleadings

According to Articles 455(3) and 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, if a defendant does not appear in the court on the date of public trial in a summary order, the court shall not open the court without the attendance of the defendant. However, according to Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, when the defendant does not appear in the court on the date of public trial, the court shall fix the date again and if the defendant does not appear in the court on the date again

(see Supreme Court Decision 201Do11210 Decided December 8, 2011: Provided, That in order to render a judgment without a statement while a defendant was absent, the same shall apply where the defendant does not appear in the court without justifiable grounds on two consecutive occasions after receiving a legitimate court date notice.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do9291, Feb. 23, 2006; 201Do16166, Jun. 28, 2012). In this case, as seen earlier, the Defendant was not absent on two consecutive occasions, and thus, a trial is conducted without the Defendant’s statement.