Supreme Court: "Defendant Found Guilty for Absence Unaware of Indictment, Grounds for Retrial Confirmed"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The Supreme Court has ruled that if a defendant who did not receive documents such as an indictment or a summons and was unaware that a trial was proceeding, is sentenced guilty in absentia, this constitutes grounds for a retrial.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Min Yoo-sook) announced on the 14th that it overturned the original ruling which sentenced Choi, who was indicted on charges including obstruction of official duties, to 8 months in prison with a 2-year probation, and remanded the case to the Suwon District Court.

The court stated, "The first trial court rendered a guilty verdict while the defendant was absent for reasons beyond his responsibility, and the second trial proceeded under the same circumstances, dismissing the appeal," adding, "The original ruling contains grounds for a retrial as stipulated in the retrial regulations."

Choi was brought to trial on charges of assaulting and verbally abusing Mr. A, who demanded payment for drinks, after drinking with acquaintances at a pub in April 2016.

However, Choi was unaware that he had been indicted. The first trial court, unable to contact Choi, a day laborer whose residence was unclear, served the indictment and other documents by public notice (posting on the court bulletin board or official gazette when the party's whereabouts are unknown).

Article 23 of the Special Act on the Promotion of Litigation states, "If a report of failure to serve the defendant is received during the first trial proceedings and the defendant's whereabouts cannot be confirmed for six months thereafter, the trial may proceed without the defendant's statement in accordance with Supreme Court regulations."

Accordingly, the first trial proceeded with Choi absent and sentenced him to 8 months imprisonment with 2 years probation. The second trial also served the indictment by public notice and held the trial with Choi absent, subsequently dismissing the prosecutor's appeal.

Choi later learned of this and filed a petition to restore his right to appeal with the court. The court accepted his petition, stating, "Choi was unable to appeal within the appeal period due to reasons beyond his responsibility." Choi then appealed to the Supreme Court with his restored right.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.