2017Do322 Fraudulent

A

Defendant

Attorney G.

Suwon District Court Decision 2016No931 Decided August 26, 2016

September 7, 2017

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Articles 370 and 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appellate court shall revise the Criminal Procedure Act without the attendance of the defendant.

However, according to Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant shall appear in court on the court date.

If the defendant has not been appointed, the date shall be fixed again and the date fixed again without any justifiable reason.

A judgment may be rendered without the statement of the defendant, if the defendant does not appear in court, but such judgment shall be given.

In order for the defendant to be judged without the statement of this defendant, the defendant shall be entitled to a legitimate public trial twice.

It is necessary to choose not to appear in court without justifiable grounds upon receipt of a summons (Supreme Court Decision 2006.

2. 23. See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9291 Decided 23.

2. According to the records, the Defendant appeared on the first and second trial date of the lower court, and the lower court.

The fact that on July 8, 2016, the third trial date was designated and announced at the third trial date, upon closing the pleadings;

② On July 8, 2016, the Defendant appeared on the third trial date, and the lower court decided to reach an agreement.

on August 12, 2016, after the date of adjudication was postponed at the request of the court, and was designated and announced as the fourth court date.

In fact, the Defendant had been absent on the fourth trial date on August 12, 2016, and the lower court made a sentence date.

(4) The lower court shall have determined the Defendant as the fifth court date on August 26, 2016.

(Court Date of Public Trial, August 26, 2016) but has not been served due to the absence of closure, and the lower court, 15

On August 26, 2016, dismissal of an appeal by a defendant without the presence of the defendant on the fifth trial date.

the fact that the judgment was pronounced is known.

3. Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Defendant’s fourth trial date.

The defendant was not served with a writ of summons on the fifth trial date after he was absent;

The Criminal Procedure Act that has pronounced a judgment in the absence of the defendant on the fifth trial date;

The defendant violates Article 365 and the defendant's right to appearance prescribed in Articles 370 and 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

As litigation procedures are in violation of the law, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

4. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

We conclude that it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Cho Jae-chul

Ko Young-han

Chief Justice Cho Jae-hee

Justices Kim Jong-il