All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

(2) the date of this judgment.

1. The sentence of the lower court (the first instance court: six months of imprisonment, six months of imprisonment, six months of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable, based on the summary of the grounds for appeal.

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

The Court held that each appeal case against the judgment of the court below was consolidated and tried, and that among the judgment of the court below, each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

In addition, on April 17, 2017, the court of first instance decided that the service of the defendant to the public notice should be made, and on May 17, 2017, the court of first instance sentenced the defendant to six months of imprisonment with labor on June 14, 2017, when the defendant did not appear in accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

After the above judgment became formally final and conclusive on August 29, 2017, the defendant filed a petition for recovery of his right to appeal to the lower court. On September 12, 2017, the court recognized that the defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and rendered a decision to recover his right to appeal.

According to the above facts, there are grounds for the request for retrial on the ground that the defendant was unable to attend the trial of the court of first instance due to the lack of reasons.

Recognizing so, the judgment of the first instance court cannot be maintained any more, since the public notice decision is revoked in the trial and the copy, etc. of the indictment is served again, and all of the trial proceedings, including the examination of evidence, are newly progress.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio on the grounds that the above reasons for reversal exist, and the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Judgment] Criminal facts and evidence.