The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 3.5 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. There is no knife as indicated in the facts charged and there is no threat against the victim.

B. Judgment of the court below which rendered an unfair sentencing: 3.5 million won

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, the court of original judgment determined the service of the defendant on March 26, 2019 by serving a public notice, and rendered a judgment imposing a fine of KRW 3.5 million on May 22, 2019 after serving a writ of summons, etc. on May 8, 2019 by serving the defendant with a summons, etc. in accordance with the provisions of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. The court of original judgment can recognize the fact that the defendant has resided in another place from his/her domicile during the above judgment due to personal reasons, and that the court of original judgment rendered a decision to recover his/her right of appeal on October 14, 2019.

According to the above facts of recognition, there are grounds for a request for retrial under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings for the defendant's failure to attend the trial of the court below because

The judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained since all the procedures of the trial, including the examination of evidence, have been newly conducted after a copy of the indictment, etc. was served again in the trial.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion in this part is without merit, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment, and the Defendant cited a kitchen with a kitchen of 30 cm in length on December 5, 2017, which the Defendant saw and took a bath for the victim, and sufficiently recognizes the fact of intimidation. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

4. Thus, the court below's decision is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is subject to pleading.