The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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 (six months of imprisonment) is too large and unfair.

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, ① the court of original judgment sent a writ of summons, etc. by means of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and sentenced a defendant to six months of imprisonment by conducting a trial in the absence of the defendant. ② When the defendant is arrested by the execution of a sentence in accordance with the judgment of the court below which became formally final and conclusive, the defendant claimed the recovery of his/her right of appeal and claimed to the effect that he/she was unable to attend the trial because he/she was not able to recover his/her body, and ③ the court of original judgment recognized that the defendant was unable to appeal within the appeal period

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 cannot be maintained as it is, given that the lower court is proceeding with a new

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 is as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, except for adding “1. Defendant’s oral statement” to “1. Defendant’s oral statement.”

Application of Statutes

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1) (the point of drinking), Article 154 subparagraph 2, and Article 43 (Unlicensed Driving) of the Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;