beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (five million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.
2. When the defendant intends to make a judgment without the defendant's statement in accordance with Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant does not appear in the court on two consecutive occasions even after the due date of trial is notified;
(2) According to the records, the court below sent a writ of summons to the Defendant on October 25, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do9291, Feb. 23, 2006; 201Do16166, Jun. 28, 2012). On September 26, 2013, when the Defendant was served with a writ of summons on the first trial date ( October 25, 2013) of the court below, he/she was absent from the above trial date. The court below found the Defendant on November 25, 2013 that the summons was not served as a closed door door, and the court below found the Defendant to have been served on the Defendant on the third trial date ( November 29, 2013) of the court below on November 19, 2013; 30,000 won on the date of appearance held by the Defendant on May 13, 2013
Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, since the defendant was not served with a writ of summons on the second trial date, the fact that the defendant was absent from being served with a writ of summons on the third trial date does not constitute a case where the defendant can revise the Criminal Procedure Act without having been present at the court. However, the court below rendered a judgment after holding a trial in the state of absence of the defendant during the third trial date violates Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.
3. If so, the judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for reversal of authority, and thus, the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing.