The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the penalty amounting to four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the record reveals that the court below served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons by means of serving public notice in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and sentenced a fine of KRW 4 million by conducting hearings in the absence of the Defendant. The Defendant alleged to the effect that he/she was unable to receive a copy of the indictment, etc. upon filing a petition for recovery of his/her right to appeal and was unaware of the fact that the judgment was pronounced, and that the decision on recovery of appeal was made on the ground that the Defendant was unable to file

Thus, there is no reason to return to the court below's failure to attend the trial and there is a reason to request a retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Since the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of criminal facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is also accepted by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 136 of the choice of punishment;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with the detention of a workhouse is merely assaulting a public official in charge on the grounds that the defendant has delayed the payment of travel expenses.