The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant with a mental disorder committed the instant crime under the condition of mental disorder with a disability of Grade II with a mental disability.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of this case of ex officio determination, the court of original judgment determined that the service of the defendant on May 21, 2020, when the copy, etc. of indictment is not served on the defendant, shall be made by means of a public notice, and that the defendant was examined as evidence on July 8, 2020 when the defendant did not appear under Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and that the court of original judgment sentenced the defendant to one year on July 22, 2020, and that the above judgment became final and conclusive as the time limit for appeal, and that the defendant filed a request for recovery of the right to appeal against the above judgment, and that the claim for recovery

There is no reason to return to the court below's failure to attend the trial and there is a reason to request a retrial under Special Act on Promotion of Litigation, etc.

In this case, this court shall proceed with a new litigation procedure by delivering a copy of indictment to the defendant and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do17252 decided June 25, 2015, etc.). Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. According to the record of determination on the assertion of mental disorder, the fact that the defendant was a person with a disability of Grade II with mental disorder is recognized.

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the means and methods of the crime, the Defendant’s attitude and behavior after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the foregoing disability at the time of the instant crime.

It is difficult to see it.

4. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing since there is a ground for reversal ex officio.