All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that each punishment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor and four months of imprisonment with prison labor) declared by the original court against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

A. As to the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below against the defendant was pronounced, and the defendant filed each appeal, and the court decided to jointly examine each appeal case.

The judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

B. According to the records of the judgment of the first instance, the following facts are recognized.

(1) The first original court served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons of the defendant, etc. by means of serving public notice in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and sentenced the defendant to one year after he/she has been absent.

(2) The Defendant, who became formally and conclusively final and conclusive, was arrested by the execution of the punishment pursuant to the judgment of the court of first instance, and was unaware of the fact that the Defendant was unable to receive a copy of

The claim for recovery of the right of appeal was filed.

(3) The first court recognized that the defendant was unable to appeal within the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and made a decision to recover his/her right of appeal.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to attend the trial proceedings of the original court No. 1 due to a cause not attributable to him, and thus, he may request a retrial pursuant to Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Therefore, this court shall reverse the judgment of the court below 1 and render a new judgment in accordance with the result of the hearing in this court after proceeding with new litigation procedures, such as delivering a duplicate of indictment to the defendant (Supreme Court Decision 2006 June 25, 2015).