The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The first deliberation penalty (two years and six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable; and

2. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 18(2) and (3) and Article 19(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act provide that, if the location of the defendant is not confirmed even though he/she took necessary measures to confirm the location of the defendant, service of the defendant shall be made by means of public notice after six months from the date on which the report on the impossibility of service was received, and Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, service of public notice shall be made only when the domicile, office, or present location of the defendant is unknown.

Therefore, in the records, where the actual dwelling place, work place, house phone number, mobile phone number, etc. of the defendant appeared, the court shall make an attempt to promptly deliver them to such actual dwelling place, etc., or to confirm the place to be served by contact with telephone numbers, and it is not allowed to serve them by means of service and make a judgment without the defendant's statement without taking such measures (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do662, Jul. 28, 201, etc.). According to the records, the police interrogation protocol, etc. of the defendant against the defendant was recorded several times, "Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu V apartment 101 Dong 504," as the defendant's "place of actual dwelling" separately from the defendant's resident registration address, but the court of first instance, without having served them to the above address or attempted to detect their whereabouts, etc., and the court of first instance, upon closing the pleadings and sentence the defendant's oral proceedings in the absence of attendance. This constitutes a violation of the law and thus affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

such fact may be recognized.

3. Conclusion