The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and Article 18(2) and (3) and Article 19(1) of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provide that service on the accused shall be made by means of service, in a case where the whereabouts of the accused is not confirmed even though the accused was taken necessary measures to confirm the whereabouts of the accused, and Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that service on the accused may be made by means of service only when the dwelling, office, or present address of the accused is unknown. Thus, in a case where the dwelling, contact address, etc. of the accused appears in the record, an attempt should be made to confirm the place of service by means of service or contact with the address of the accused, and it is not permissible to immediately serve a writ by means of service and make a judgment without the accused’s statement without taking such measures.

(2) In light of the record, the accused’s phone number (H) during the police investigation process, and the accused’s workplace (which means the phone number of the accused and the Defendant’s workplace) in the prosecutor’s investigation process, and the Defendant stated the Defendant’s workplace in the prosecutor’s office (which means the 12 pages and 147 pages). The lower court, without taking such measures, should have tried to confirm the place of service by communicating the phone number of the accused and the Defendant’s workplace in the decision of service by public notice, and concluded that the Defendant’s location was not confirmed, and thus, the lower court’s decision that the Defendant was served by public notice and without the Defendant’s statement violates the special rules on special cases concerning the promotion, etc. of litigation and the promotion, etc. of litigation, and thus, the litigation procedure is unlawful.