All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

The defendant is punished by a fine of 2,00,000, and damages to property.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in the first instance court: a fine of two million won, a fine of three million won, and a fine of three million won) of each of the lower court's punishment (in the second instance court: the second instance court) is unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination on the first instance judgment

A. According to the records, the court of first instance sent a copy of the indictment against the Defendant to Daegu North-gu G, which is the address indicated in the indictment, but was not served for the reason that the director is unknown. ② The court of first instance sent a copy of the indictment, etc. to "Seoul-gu H, which is the address corrected by the prosecutor on September 13, 2012, but was not served due to the absence of the closed text, requested the detection of the location on September 13, 2012, and on October 11, 2012, "The defendant was out of the front place and the mother I will not have contact the Defendant with his house for a long time," and the court of first instance rendered the decision of the court below on October 11, 2012 to the effect that "the defendant was present at the investigative agency on October 17, 2012, and the defendant was present at the court of first instance by public notice, and the court of first instance can acknowledge the defendant's telephone number on the defendant's summons by publication 10, and fourth 214.

However, prior to the decision of service by public notice, an attempt should be made to find a place where a defendant can be served by means of serving documents, such as serving documents on the actual place of residence as recorded in the record, or confirming by telephone, and it is unlawful to render a judgment without the defendant's statement. Thus, Supreme Court Decision 2004Do7145 Decided February 25, 2005, etc.