The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

In light of the above, the defendant could not be present at the trial of the court below due to the reason that the defendant cannot be held responsible for the request for retrial. Therefore, the judgment of the court below has a ground for request for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases

In fact, there was no intention to obtain fraud in relation to the three of the facts charged in the instant case.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Where a judgment of conviction was finalized after the defendant was absent pursuant to the main sentence of Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings for Requests for Retrial (hereinafter “Special Cases Provisions”), if the defendant is unable to attend the trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may request a retrial of conviction pursuant to Article 23-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Special Cases Provisions”).

However, with respect to the judgment of the first instance, which became final and conclusive upon conviction without a defendant's statement pursuant to the special provisions of this case, where the defendant filed a petition for recovery of appeal on the grounds that the defendant or his agent could not file an appeal within the period for filing an appeal due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and where such cause includes circumstances in which the defendant could not be present in the trial due to a cause not attributable to him/her, it is reasonable to deem that the grounds for appeal corresponding to "when a cause for requesting a retrial exists" as prescribed in Article 361-5 subparagraph 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act is asserted by the provisions of this case.

Therefore, in the case above, the appellate court should examine whether the grounds for the request for retrial under the provisions of the retrial of this case exist, and there are such grounds.

In other words, if recognized, a copy of the indictment.