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 (e.g., imprisonment) by the lower court (e., nine months) is too unreasonable.

2. Reviewing the reasoning for appeal ex officio prior to the judgment, the record reveals that ① the court below served a copy, etc. of the indictment by public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings on the ground that the whereabouts of the defendant cannot be confirmed, and rendered a judgment imposing the defendant on September 20, 2018 by serving the trial proceedings in the absence of the defendant; ② the defendant alleged to the effect that he was unaware of the fact that a public prosecution was not instituted because he/she was unable to be served with a copy, etc. of the indictment upon his/her request for recovery of his/her right to appeal on November 15, 2018; and the court below recognized the fact that the defendant was unable to appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant on November 16, 2018 and rendered a decision to recover the right

In full view of the process of the above case and the records of the case in this case, the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court below due to a cause not attributable to himself, and it is recognized that there are grounds for the request for retrial under Article 23-2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which constitutes grounds for appeal under Article 361-5 subparagraph 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, the appellate court, which is the appellate court, shall reverse the judgment below and render a new decision according to the new results of the trial.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do8243 Decided November 26, 2015, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Do17252 Decided June 25, 2015, etc.). Accordingly, the lower judgment became impossible to maintain it as it is.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal.