공시송달의 적법성 판단에 관한 고찰-대법원 공시송달 관련 판례분석을 중심으로-

Service by public notice enables one to be aware of the specifics of the service publication, thereby giving rise to the effectiveness of the service. Service by public notice has been acknowledged for the smooth facilitation of the judicial procedure, in the case that the dispatch is impossible. Service by public notice is permitted only as an exceptional and supplementary method. On the other hand, there has been a controversy regarding the legitimacy of service by public notice at the courts; as a result, the Supreme Court of Korea has rendered a substantial number of cases. The recommendations concerning service by public notice are as follows: first, the requirement of service by public notice stipulated under the current law, “When it is impossible to find out the residence, the office, and the current residential place,” should be revised. It should be revised in a way that at least, the identification of one’s residence is impossible and the service dispatcher has taken the necessary measures for the service by public notice to be effective. Thus, it is necessary to have a provision on the obligation of inquiring the location of a defendant. Second, given the fact that in most cases, the address stated in the protocol containing the interrogation of a suspect is copied and any post-change of a defendant is not confirmed, the prosecution should confirm the current address and contact information before the indictment, and the defendant should be notified that he or she shall be disadvantaged if he or she properly reports any change in his or her address. Thus, there should be a specific procedural provision concerning a defendant that the address report, the report of any change thereto, and the notification of the possible disadvantages arising from any failure to report a change.