The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

A. Article 12(1) of the Constitution regarding the appointment of counsel against the detained accused is entitled to prompt assistance of counsel when arrested or detained.

Article 33 (1) 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "In order to guarantee the right to assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Constitution, the court shall appoint a counsel ex officio if the defendant is detained."

“The lower court, on June 20, 2016, closed the pleadings and issued a detention warrant to the Defendant on February 10, 2017, and on February 15, 2017, issued a judgment on February 22, 2017, without appointing a national defense counsel to the Defendant even though the instant detention warrant was executed and the Defendant was detained.

Considering the circumstances, the court below committed an unlawful act that infringes on the defendant's right of defense (the right to receive assistance of counsel) guaranteed by the Constitution and the Criminal Litigation Act by failing to appoint the counsel of the defendant under detention immediately, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in this regard.

B. Article 19(1) of the Special Rule on Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits Related to Public Disclosure Service for the Defendant who is unable to serve the documents is required to serve the documents on public notice after the receipt of the report where the location of the Defendant is not confirmed by six months from the receipt of the report.

In this regard, the lower court ordered the Defendant to serve a public notice from October 4, 2016, which was the time when the report on the failure to serve on the Defendant was received by the lower court, on February 6, 2017, before the lapse of six months from the date of receipt by the lower court. In this regard, the lower court can be maintained.