The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant provided only luto persons at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, and provided them only at the scene of the crime, and did not know at all as to which purpose the Defendant came to the scene of the crime, and whether others carried a deadly weapon. Although there was no conspiracy with regard to special intrusion upon residence and carrying a deadly weapon, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misunderstanding

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the records, the court below is recognized that the defendant served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons on the method of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and served the defendant with a prison labor for one year, etc., and the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below formally finalized, and filed a petition for recovery of the right of appeal, and the court recognized that the defendant was unable to appeal within the appeal period due to reasons not attributable to the defendant.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court below due to a cause not attributable to the defendant. Thus, the court below's judgment has a ground for a request for retrial under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which constitutes "when a ground for request for retrial exists" as the ground for appeal under Article 361-5 subparagraph 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Therefore, since this court newly proceeded with the procedure of trial, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the existence of such reasons for reversal of authority.