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 (public prosecutor) by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 18(2) and (3) and Article 19(1) of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings ex officio prior to the determination of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor of the ex officio judgment provides that service on the defendant shall be made by serving public notice if the whereabouts of the defendant is not confirmed even though the defendant was taken necessary measures to confirm the whereabouts of the defendant. Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that service on the defendant may be made by serving public notice only when the dwelling, office, or present whereabouts of the defendant is unknown.

Therefore, in the event that other dwelling places and contact numbers of the defendant appear on the record, an attempt should be made to send a writ of summons to such address or to confirm the place where the defendant is to be served by contact with his/her contact address, and it is not allowed to promptly serve a summons by means of public notice delivery and to render a judgment without the defendant's statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do3892, Jul. 12, 2007; 201Do6762, Jul. 28, 2011). According to the records, the complainant stated the defendant's pro-friendly L mobile phone number (M) in the investigation process, and the court below attempted to confirm the place where the defendant is served by contact with L's mobile phone number (30 pages and 30 pages).

The court below's decision that the defendant's location is not confirmed without such measures is delivered by the method of public disclosure immediately and decided without the defendant's statement is in violation of the special rules on the promotion, etc. of litigation and the promotion of litigation, etc., and the procedure of litigation is unlawful. Thus, the court below's decision cannot be maintained further.