Let $N \in \mathbb{N}$. It is well known that $$ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} e^{2 \pi i \frac{k}{N}} =0. $$ More generally, if $N=pq$ and $P=\{ 0, q,\cdots, (p-1)q \}$, then $$ \sum_{k \in P} e^{2 \pi i \frac{k}{N}} =0. $$
My question :is the converse true?
If $P \subseteq \{0,1,\cdots,N-1\}$ such that
$$ \sum_{k \in P} e^{2 \pi i \frac{k}{N}} =0, $$
can we show that the set $P$ has the form $P=\{ 0, q,\cdots, (p-1)q \}$ where $N=pq$?
The above question is not true.
If $P \subseteq \{0,1,\cdots,N-1\}$ such that
$$ \sum_{k \in P} e^{2 \pi i \frac{k}{N}} =0, $$
and any proper subset of $P$ doesn’t satisfy the equality,
can we show that the set $P$ has the form $P=\{ 0, q,\cdots, (p-1)q \}$ where $N=pq$?
No, the converse is not true, because you can take unions of such sets (if $\sum_{k\in P}=0$ and $\sum_{k\in P'}=0$, then $\sum_{k\in P \cup P'}=0$.
For example, if $P=\{ 0, q,\cdots, (p-1)q \} \cup \{ 0, p,\cdots, (q-1)p \}$ (with, say $p=3,q=5$) then $P$ is not of the form you gave.