The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment of imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment) of the original judgment is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

According to the records, the court of original judgment shall serve a copy, etc. of indictment by public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings because the whereabouts of the defendant cannot be confirmed, and the court of original judgment shall proceed with the trial proceedings in the absence of the defendant, and sentenced the defendant to ten months of imprisonment on August 13, 2019. The defendant submitted a petition for recovery of his right of appeal on August 29, 2019. The court of original judgment rendered a decision to recover the defendant's right of appeal by recognizing that the defendant was unable to appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and the court of original judgment rendered a decision to recover the defendant's right of appeal

According to the above facts of recognition, it is recognized that there is no reason attributable to the defendant due to the failure of the court below to attend the trial, and there is a reason for the request for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Accordingly, this court shall complete new litigation procedures, such as serving the defendant with a duplicate of indictment, and render a new judgment according to the new trial results (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 201

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and the summary of evidence admitted by this court and the summary of evidence are the same as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below, except where "the defendant's oral statement" is added to the summary of evidence. Thus, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.