The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Although the defendant argued that he was guilty of facts, he withdrawn from the trial date on one occasion.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The following facts can be acknowledged according to the records of ex officio recognition.

The court below served a copy of the indictment and the writ of summons of the defendant to AR or MaS on the grounds that the defendant was absent from the date of the public trial once, but served a copy, etc. of the indictment by the method of serving public notice pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Litigation Promotion Act”) on the grounds that the defendant's whereabouts cannot be confirmed since he/she was absent from the date of public trial, and sentenced the defendant to a judgment sentenced to ten months of imprisonment on July 9, 2020 after the defendant was absent.

After the period of appeal against the lower judgment was expired, the Defendant filed a petition for recovery of his right to appeal by asserting that he did not file an appeal within the period of appeal due to any cause not attributable to him.

On October 28, 2020, the court rendered a decision to restore the defendant's right to appeal on the ground that "a copy of indictment and a writ of summons of the defendant are served only on the family members not living together with the defendant, and the defendant was not served lawfully, and the procedure of trial was progress and the judgment was sentenced in the absence of the defendant according to the publication service, and the defendant was not appealed within the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant."

Judgment

Since the grounds for filing a petition for the recovery of a defendant's right to appeal include grounds for filing a petition for retrial under Article 23-2 (1) of the Litigation Promotion Act, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant alleged grounds for appeal corresponding to "when grounds for filing a petition for retrial exist" under Article 361-5 (1) 13 of the Criminal

According to the records, the court below was unable to attend the trial due to a cause not attributable to the defendant.

Since it is recognized, there are grounds for a request for retrial under the Civil Procedure Promotion Act.

Therefore, the trial of the court is that of the defendant.