The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, when the whereabouts of the accused are unknown, a public notice may be served. Articles 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and Articles 18 and 19 of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings do not apply to cases falling under death penalty, imprisonment with or without prison labor exceeding ten years, or imprisonment with or without prison labor, during the trial of the first instance, for the purpose of identifying the whereabouts of the accused, if it is impossible to confirm the whereabouts of the accused after six months from the receipt of the report on the impossibility of service by the accused, the subsequent service to the accused shall be served by means of serving public notice.

In this context, the six-month period is the minimum period established to protect the defendant's right to trial and the defendant's right to defense. As such, the first instance court's service of public notice to the defendant was not allowed even after six months have not passed since the receipt of the report (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do300, Apr. 26, 2012; 2015Do9572, Dec. 10, 2015). (b) According to the records, the defendant is not detained on suspicion of fraud on April 22, 2015 and was served on May 15, 2015; and the defendant was served with a copy of the indictment, a decision to appoint a national defense counsel on May 15, 2015; and the same year.

5. On July 22, 2016, when the defendant was present until the 10th public trial, which was held on April 22, 2016, the date of the first public trial, which was scheduled on July 22, 2016, in the progress of the 15th public trial, and was absent on the 11th public trial date, which was scheduled on July 22, 2016; the court of original judgment designated the defendant as the date of the sentence B on August 10, 2016 and returned the defendant again, but the writ was not served due to the absence of closure, and the writ of summons is not served on the 14th public trial date.