The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was unable to attend the trial of the lower court due to a cause not attributable to him. Therefore, there is a ground for requesting a retrial under Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records, the court below served a writ of summons by means of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and served a duplicate of the indictment on the part of the defendant's resident registration, by mail, which is "Seongnam-gu F", which is the address of the defendant's resident registration, and received it by the relative of the defendant. However, the indictment was written in which other place than the above resident registration address was actually entered in the defendant's resident registration address, and the defendant actually resided in

There is no evidence to see that there was no evidence, so a copy of the indictment was legally served on the defendant.

It is difficult to see it.

In the event that the defendant was absent, he was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by proceeding with a trial, and the defendant was arrested by the execution of the sentence in accordance with the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive, the defendant claims the recovery of his right to appeal immediately, and the defendant did not know the fact that the public prosecution was instituted because he was not served with a copy of the indictment, etc.

In full view of this, the defendant was unable to appear in the trial proceedings of the court below for reasons not attributable to him.

may be filed.

Thus, barring any other circumstance, there is a ground to request a retrial under the Special Act on the Promotion, etc. of Litigation due to the defendant's failure to attend the trial of the court below's failure

Therefore, the defendant's argument in this part of the appeal is justified (Supreme Court Decision 2011 November 26, 2015).