The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

2. According to the records of this case’s ex officio determination, the court below: (a) served a copy of indictment and a writ of summons by means of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and served the defendant with a trial in the absence of the defendant; (b) alleged to the purport that the defendant was unable to receive a copy of indictment, etc. and was unaware of the fact that the judgment was pronounced; and (c) on the ground that the defendant did not appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant

According to the above facts of recognition, there are grounds for a request for retrial under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Litigation due to the lack of reasons attributable to the defendant who was unable to attend the trial of the court below, and accordingly, this court has tried to proceed with a new litigation procedure to the defendant, so the judgment of the court below is

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, since there is a ground for reversal ex officio as above, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

[Reasons for the new judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for the case where the defendant's statement "the defendant's court statement" in the summary of the evidence of the judgment of the court below is admitted as the "police suspect examination protocol against the defendant" as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it

Application of Statutes

1. The relevant Article of the Criminal Act as to the crime and Article 323 of the Criminal Act on the selection of punishment (Selection of Imprisonment) did not completely recover the amount of damage caused by the sentencing.

This is the defendant.