The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the gist of the grounds for appeal of this case can be recognized as territorial jurisdiction against the defendant at the time of the prosecution of this case, the judgment of the court below which rendered a judgment of violation of jurisdiction is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case, the defendant's transfer of the means of access, such as a passbook, to the needy person upon receipt of a proposal from the needy person is nearby Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City. The defendant's domicile, residence and present location at the time of the prosecution of this case can be recognized as "Seoul Special Metropolitan City B apartment No. 107 Dong102, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu at the time of the prosecution of this case." The above places do not fall under the territorial jurisdiction of the court of the original court, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the court

B. According to the records of this case, on July 8, 2014, which was before the first trial date of the court below, the defendant filed a formal trial against the summary order of this case on July 8, 2014, and submitted a document stating that "the defendant wants to be tried at the Seoul Northern District Court on the ground that he suffered from public disorder," and on July 25, 2014, the defendant submitted a written opinion to the court on July 25, 2014, "I wish to talk to the court before the trial of this case," and repeatedly stated that "I want to talk to the court before the trial of this case," for the above reasons, the defendant did not appear on September 4, 2014, which was the first trial date of the court below, and it is recognized that the court of the court of the court below made a statement to the effect that the prosecutor did not have any special opinion on the violation of jurisdiction.

Article 320 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "an application for violation of jurisdiction shall be filed before the statement of the accused case is made," and there is no special restriction on the method of application.