logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2013.05.24 2013노621
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for ten months) by the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to the records, the court of the court below ex officio: (a) sent a copy of the indictment against the defendant, a writ of summons of the defendant, etc. to "Gu Si K" but failed to be served due to the unknown whereabouts of the director or the addressee; (b) on February 10, 2012, the court of the court of the court below entrusted the detection of the location of the above address on March 2, 2012; and (c) on March 9, 2012, the court of the court of the court of the court below sent the report on the detection of the location that "the defendant could not have been sent to the above address and the director would have gone to the above address on December 2, 2012"; (d) on March 9, 2012, the court of the court of the court of the court of the court below returned the detention warrant on the ground that the defendant was issued a detention warrant but was missing; and (e) on September 12, 2012, the court of the court of the court of the court below rendered a judgment without hearing.

B. As above, it cannot be said that the service by means of service by public notice was conducted without communicating the above No. 133 with the phone number stated in the lower court’s records and without confirming the place where service is to be made by public notice.

Therefore, this case cannot be deemed to constitute “when the dwelling, office, or present address of the defendant is unknown” which is the requirement of service by public notice, and the court of the original court’s proceeding without the defendant’s statement after serving a writ of summons by public notice and rendering a judgment without the defendant’s statement constitutes a case where the defendant did not have an opportunity to attend without any justifiable reason,

(c).

arrow