The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In a case where a judgment of conviction becomes final and conclusive after the defendant was absent pursuant to the main sentence of Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Special Provisions”), if the defendant is unable to attend a trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may request a retrial for conviction pursuant to Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Special Provisions”).

However, in a case where the defendant filed a claim for recovery of right to appeal for the reason that he could not file an appeal within the period for filing an appeal due to a cause not attributable to the defendant or his representative without requesting a retrial pursuant to the provisions of the special provisions of this case, if the circumstances during which the defendant could not be held in the trial due to a cause not attributable to him, it is reasonable to view that the defendant asserted that there was a cause for requesting a retrial pursuant to the provisions of the special provisions of this case, and that the reason for appeal corresponding to “when a cause for requesting a retrial exists” as prescribed in Article 361-5 subparag. 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act is asserted.

Therefore, the appellate court shall examine whether there are grounds for the request for retrial under the provisions of the retrial of this case, and there are such grounds.

If it is recognized, the judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed, and a new judgment shall be rendered in accordance with the result of the new trial, such as serving a copy, etc. of indictment again (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). (b) According to the records of this case, the lower court serve a copy, summons, etc. of indictment on the method of serving public notice in accordance with the special provisions of this case, and the trial shall be conducted in the absence of the Defendant.