beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment).
2. According to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, a notice service on the defendant can be made only when the dwelling, office, or present location of the defendant is unknown. Thus, in the records, where the defendant's home number or mobile phone number appears, an attempt should be made to confirm the place to be served with the above telephone number, and it is unlawful to promptly serve the defendant by means of public notice without going through such procedures (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do11210, Dec. 8, 2011). According to the records, the fact that the defendant was still absent from the date of the first public trial at the court below, the court below entrusted the detection of the whereabouts of the defendant at the first public trial at the same time, and provided several cell phone numbers of the defendant to contact with the defendant on June 2, 202, and then, the court below made a decision to serve the notice on the defendant's cell phone number without contact with the defendant's address address.
Therefore, the court below should have taken such measures as contact with the above other cell phone numbers confirmed on the records and identifying the location of the defendant, but it was concluded that the defendant's whereabouts cannot be known without taking such measures and promptly served by means of public notice violates Article 63 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings, etc.
As long as the procedure of trial by the court below was conducted by illegal publication service, such illegality has influenced the judgment.
As such, the judgment of the court below is more.