The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

On January 12, 2017, the lower court determined that the service of the accused is the method of serving public notice, and sentenced the accused to a four-month imprisonment on April 5, 2017, when the accused did not appear in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

On May 31, 2017, after the above judgment became formally final and conclusive, Defendant filed a petition for recovery of his right to appeal to the lower court. On June 29, 2017, the lower court recognized that Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant, and rendered a decision to recover his right to appeal.

According to the above facts, there is no reason to assume that the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court and there is a reason to request a retrial.

The judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained, since the public notice service decision is revoked in the trial and the copy, etc. of the indictment is served again, and all of the trial proceedings, including the examination of evidence, are newly progress.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio as above. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by the court and the summary of the evidence are as follows: (a) in addition to the alteration of the "police interrogation protocol against the defendant to the "legal statement of the defendant" in the summary of the evidence of the court below, it is identical to the corresponding column of the court below's judgment; and (b) thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment