The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (4 months of imprisonment) by the court below is too unreasonable.

According to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for ex officio determination, when the dwelling, office, or present address of a defendant is unknown, service by public notice may be made, and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 18 and Article 19 of the Special Rules Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provide that service by public notice shall be made when the location of a defendant is not confirmed at the time of receipt of a report on impossibility of service by public notice, even though a person was not a case falling under death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor exceeding ten years, or imprisonment with or without prison labor in the first instance trial.

Therefore, if the defendant's office telephone number or mobile phone number appears on the record, it is necessary to have an attempt to contact the above telephone number with the location of service and to see the place of service, and to promptly serve by public notice without taking such measures is in violation of Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do1094 Decided May 13, 2011). Any report on detection of a location that the chief of a police station having jurisdiction over the Defendant’s domicile, etc. following the court’s request for the detection of location may be deemed as having the same function as a report on impossibility of service, on the grounds that the police officer’s personal location is confirmed by means of visiting the Defendant’s direct service address and searching for residents or neighboring residents, etc., and thus, it can more accurately confirm the Defendant’s whereabouts than

Therefore, the receipt of a report on detection of location can be seen as the "receiving of a report on impossibility of service" under Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings