The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

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

1. The lower court’s sentence (four months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. On June 30, 2017, the lower court determined that the Defendant was unable to serve a copy, etc. of the indictment on the grounds that the whereabouts of the Defendant is unknown, and determined that the service of the Defendant was made by means of serving public notice on the Defendant. On August 18, 2017, the lower court conducted an examination of evidence under the Defendant’s absence of attendance pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and sentenced the Defendant to four months imprisonment and two

According to the above facts, there is no reason to assume that the defendant was unable to attend the trial and there is a reason to request a retrial.

Recognized.

Accordingly, this court's revocation of the decision to serve public notice and again served a copy of the indictment, etc., and then newly progress all the trial proceedings including the examination of evidence, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

In addition, on January 19, 2018, the defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Eastern District Court and the above judgment became final and conclusive on January 27, 2018.

The crime of fraud and this case, which has become final and conclusive, shall be sentenced to punishment for the crime of this case in consideration of equity in cases where a judgment is to be rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act due to the concurrent crimes relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can not be maintained as it is.

3. The judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for reversal ex officio. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act after omitting judgment of the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing.

【Grounds for the judgment in Seoul Eastern District Court on January 19, 2018] Criminal facts and summary of the evidence recognized by the court below, and summary of the evidence, shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant at the Seoul Eastern District Court on January 19, 2018.