The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The witness was adopted on the trial date and the witness was notified to the defendant to be examined on the next trial date, and the witness was present on the next trial date, but the defendant did not appear without any justifiable reason, the witness was examined as an examination other than the trial date, and the examination of evidence on the witness protocol is legitimate as the examination procedure of evidence.

(2) According to the records, the defendant was absent from the court of first instance on the second trial date without justifiable grounds even though he was notified by the court of the first instance that the witness examination of E and F will be conducted on the second trial date. The witness E and F appeared at each court on the second trial date, and the court of first instance notified the defendant of the contents of the protocol of examination of witness on the third trial date after the extension of the second trial date and the examination of witness to E and F on the third trial date after the examination of witness to E and F was completed on the second trial date. The court of first instance notified the defendant of the contents of the protocol of examination of witness. The defendant stated that he did not have any different opinion on the protocol of examination of witness.

In light of the above legal principles, the examination procedure of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the protocol of the examination of the witness prepared in the procedure is admissible as a matter of course pursuant to Article 315 subparagraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is a document prepared under the circumstances that make it possible to credit, so long as it has gone through legitimate examination of evidence, it may

The court below is just in maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance that found the above witness examination protocol as evidence of guilt, and there were no errors such as violation of the Act on the Procedure for Examination of Witness or deprivation of the defendant

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.