The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The sentence of the lower court (five million won a penalty) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

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

According to the records of this case, the lower court: (a) served a summons of the Defendant on the method of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings; (b) declared a fine of KRW 5 million on June 17, 2014 in the absence of the Defendant; and (c) asserted that the Defendant was unaware of his/her claim for recovery of the right to appeal against the judgment of the lower court formally finalized; and (c) recognized that the Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant on August 17, 2018, and determined the recovery of the right to appeal.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, there is no reason to believe that the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court below, and thus, there is a ground to request a retrial under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion of Lawsuit falling under the Reasons for Appeal under Article 361-5 Item 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act

As such, the appellate court should proceed with a new litigation procedure against the defendant and make a new decision according to the result of a new trial.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The criminal facts recognized by this court are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Summary of Evidence

The records of the case subject to review are already destroyed due to the expiration of the preservation period, and the records are completely restored.