The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable as the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, ① the court of original judgment sent a copy of 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 the defendant to eight months of imprisonment by conducting hearings in the absence of the defendant. ② The defendant asserted that he was unaware of the fact that he was not aware of the fact that a public prosecution was instituted because he was not served with a copy of indictment, etc. upon request for recovery of his right of appeal against the judgment of original judgment formally finalized, and ③ the court of original judgment recognized that the defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to

As the Defendant was unable to attend the trial in the lower court due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant, the lower court’s judgment constitutes “when there is a cause for requesting a retrial” (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015) which is the grounds for appeal prescribed in Article 361-5 subparag. 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is the grounds for appeal (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s judgment cannot be maintained as it is, given that the Defendant is unable to serve a duplicate of indictment on the Defendant,

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing, and it is again decided after pleading.

[Re-written Decision] The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence deleted “1. Defendant’s legal statement” and, except for adding “1. Defendant’s trial testimony” to “the Defendant’s trial testimony”, is as stated in the corresponding column of the lower judgment.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts