The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of this case's decision ex officio, ① the court below sent a copy of indictment and a writ of summons through service by public notice in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and sentenced six months to imprisonment by conducting the trial in the absence of the defendant. ② When the defendant is arrested by the execution of punishment in accordance with the judgment below which became formally final and conclusive, he asserted to the purport that he was unaware of the fact that he requested for recovery of the right of appeal and was unable to receive a copy of indictment, etc., and ③ the court below recognized that he was unable to appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant,

Since the Defendant was unable to attend the trial in the trial due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant, there was a ground for requesting a retrial under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which constitutes “when there is a ground for requesting a retrial,” which is the ground for appeal under Article 361-

(see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). Therefore, this Court shall proceed with new litigation procedures, such as serving a copy of indictment on the accused, and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial. Therefore, the lower judgment cannot be maintained.

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

[Discied Judgment] Except for the addition of “1. Defendant’s oral statement” to the summary of the evidence in the lower judgment’s summary of criminal facts and evidence, it is identical to the corresponding column of the lower judgment.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and the former Road Traffic Act concerning the selection of punishment for the crime.