All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

The defendant shall make an application for compensation to the applicant for compensation in the trial.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and 6 months) of the lower court’s punishment (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant before determining ex officio.

A. According to the records of this case as to the existence of grounds for retrial (as to the judgment of the court of first instance), the court of first instance served a copy of the indictment and a writ of summons by public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and served a trial in the absence of the defendant, and sentenced one year and

Accordingly, the Defendant alleged that he/she was unaware of the fact that his/her residence was prosecuted and the judgment was pronounced when he/she filed a petition for recovery of his/her right to appeal on September 21, 2018. The first court recognized that the Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and recognized that the Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and determined to recover the right to appeal by recognizing that the Defendant was unable to file an appeal within the appeal period.

According to this, it is recognized that there are grounds for a request for retrial under Article 23-2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings because the defendant was not responsible for failing to attend the trial of the court of first instance, which constitutes "when there are grounds for request for retrial" under Article 361-5

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8243, Nov. 26, 2015). Therefore, this Court shall proceed with new litigation procedures and render a new judgment according to the result of a new trial by delivering a copy, etc. of indictment to the Defendant. As such, the first instance judgment cannot be maintained.

B. As the case of the first and second judgments of the court below, each of the crimes of the first and second judgment against the defendant was concurrent in the trial, the crimes of the first and second judgment against the defendant were concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.