The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the crime list of erroneous facts of the judgment below, some of the items in the crime list of erroneous facts in the judgment of the court below are not borrowed from the victim, and since the victim knowingly lent money to the defendant with knowledge that he had no ability to repay, the defendant did not deceiving the victim as to his intent

B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Article 266 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “When a public prosecution is instituted, the court shall serve without delay a copy of the indictment on the defendant or his/her defense counsel: Provided, That the service shall be made not later than five days prior to the date of the first public trial.” Thus, if the first public trial is conducted without serving the defendant or his/her defense counsel with a copy of the indictment, it constitutes a violation of the statutes governing the

In such a case, if the defendant was given an opportunity to sufficiently state the facts charged without raising an objection in the court of first instance, there is no error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(3) In a case where the first instance court summonss a defendant through service by public notice, and the first instance court proceedings were conducted while the defendant was not present on the trial date, the act of litigation conducted in such unlawful trial proceedings is invalid. In such a case, the appellate court shall serve the defendant or his defense counsel with a copy of the indictment and render a new litigation through lawful procedures, and then render a judgment again on the basis of the result of the trial, such as statement and examination of evidence, etc., in the appellate court.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Do9498 Decided April 24, 2014). B.

According to the records of this case, the court below did not serve the defendant with a copy of the indictment, a writ of summons of trial date, etc., and summoned the defendant by public notice.