The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Where a judgment becomes final and conclusive after having been convicted of a defendant under the absence of the defendant pursuant to the main sentence of Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Ex officio Proceedings, etc., if the defendant is unable to attend a trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may request a retrial of the conviction pursuant to Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion,

Therefore, the appellate court should examine whether there are grounds for the request for retrial under the provisions of the retrial of this case, and if it is recognized that there are such grounds, the appellate court shall reverse the judgment of the first instance and render a new judgment in accordance with the results of the new trial.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243 Decided November 26, 2015, etc.). The lower court determined on January 16, 2019 that the Defendant was unable to serve a copy, etc. of the indictment on the grounds that the whereabouts of the Defendant is unknown, and determined that the service of the Defendant was by public notice, and that the Defendant was not present on February 26, 2019 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 same Act, and conducted an examination of evidence on the part of the Defendant on March 29, 2019.

According to the above facts, it is recognized that there is no reason attributable to the defendant who was unable to attend the trial of the court below, and there is a reason for the request for retrial.

Therefore, since the court revoked the decision of service by public notice in the trial and served the copy of the indictment again, all of the trial proceedings including the investigation of evidence, including the examination of evidence, have become impossible to maintain the judgment below.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of ex officio reversal.