The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal by the prosecutor (six months of imprisonment) is too unfortunate and unfair.

Before determining the grounds for appeal by a prosecutor ex officio, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the contents and legislative purport of Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Special Provisions”) and Article 23-2(1) of the Litigation Promotion Act (hereinafter “Rules for Review”); (b) the Defendant’s right to fair trial and right to defense as prescribed by the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act; (c) the constitutional spirit declaring due process; and (d) the need to substantially protect the Defendant’s right to fair trial by the first instance court and the appellate court without any reason, even in cases where the first instance court and the appellate court, which were proceeded pursuant to the provisions for special provisions, have dismissed the judgment of the first instance and the appellate court, and the judgment of conviction has become final and conclusive after having been dismissed and the appellate court was absent, without any justifiable reason, by applying the provisions for retrial again.

In addition, if the defendant filed an appeal based on the recovery of the right to appeal without filing a request for review, and asserts the above grounds for appeal, it can be seen as constituting “when there is a ground for request for retrial” in the judgment of the court below as stipulated by Article 383 subparag. 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, it can be deemed as constituting “when there is a

B. In accordance with the purport of the judgment of remanding the first instance court that followed the appellate trial procedure after remanding the case that a son reversed due to the above reasons, the court below reversed the first instance court pursuant to the special provisions without the Defendant’s fault, and the reasons for appeal under Article 361-5 subparag. 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the judgment of first instance.