The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Changwon District Court Dao branch.

1. It is considered ex officio as infringement on the right to a participatory trial;

A. A participatory trial implemented pursuant to the Act on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials (hereinafter “Act”) is a system introduced to enhance democratic legitimacy and trust of justice (Article 1 of the Act). Any person has the right to a participatory trial as prescribed by law (Article 3(1) of the Act). Thus, a case subject to a participatory trial pursuant to the Act is in principle conducted according to the participatory trial procedure. However, if a defendant does not want a participatory trial or if a court decides to exclude a participatory trial on the ground under any subparagraph of Article 9(1) of the Act, a participatory trial

(Article 5(1) and (2) of the Act. As such, whether a participatory trial is held or not is decided primarily by the defendant's will, if a case subject to a participatory trial is indicted, the court shall confirm to the defendant whether he/she/it wants a participatory trial in writing, etc. (Article 8(1) of the Act). To this end, the court shall deliver to the defendant or his/her counsel a guide on the participatory trial stating the procedure for a participatory trial, submission of a document under Article 8(2) of the Act, restriction on the change of opinion under Article 8(4) of the Act, and other precautions.

(Article 3(1) of the Rules on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials. If a court proceeds a trial in ordinary trial without confirming the defendant's desire for a participatory trial, it is a serious infringement on the defendant's right to a participatory trial, and such procedure is unlawful and its procedural acts conducted in unlawful trial proceedings should also be deemed null and void.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do7106 Decided September 8, 2011). B.

According to the records, the records are as follows.