The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

ex officio, the lower court rendered a judgment of acquittal on the facts charged of the instant case on October 14, 2016, on the premise that the judgment of summary trial, which sentenced a fine of KRW 50,00,00,00, to the Jeonju District Court Decision 201Hun-Ga10, rendered final and conclusive, on the same facts charged of the instant case.

However, on October 21, 2016, the defendant recognized that he/she submitted a request for formal trial with the name of the defendant written in writing, and the seal or impediment to the above documents is not affixed to the above documents, but the documents prepared by a person other than a public official under Article 59 and Article 59 of the amended Criminal Procedure Act (No. 15164, Dec. 12, 2017) (No. 15164, Dec. 12, 2017)

If there is no seal, it shall be hindered.

= A document prepared by a person other than a public official shall be dated, and shall be signed and sealed or signed.

If there is no seal, it shall be hindered.

Article 57 of the former Criminal Procedure Act (Documents of Public Officials) (1) Except as otherwise provided in Acts, the date of preparation and the public office to which the public official belongs shall be stated, and their names and seals or signatures.

In full view of the purport of the above formal trial, where it is evident that the defendant was prepared by his/her genuine will due to circumstances such as before and after the above formal trial application, it shall be deemed that the signature alone made a legitimate request for formal trial.

(3) As to the facts charged in the instant case, the Prosecutor filed a summary order on November 8, 2016 with the same content as the case in which a public prosecution was instituted, and thus, the Prosecutor should have rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, even if the instant case was not yet finalized, since the instant case involving a summary order filed by the chief of a police station, which is recognized as the same procedural act as the indictment, was not yet finalized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake.