2. After filing an application for designation of the date.

Even if a pleading is not made, an appeal shall be deemed to have been withdrawn unless an application for designating a date is filed within one month from the date of pleading without the second attendance (Article 268(2) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Act). Even if the Plaintiff was legally notified of the date of pleading in the party proceedings, the Plaintiff was not present at the second day of pleading on October 13, 2015, and the second day of pleading on October 27, 2015, and the Defendant was present at each of the above dates of pleading, but did not present each of them, and the fact that the Plaintiff filed an application for designating a date only after December 10, 2015 after one month from the second date of pleading is apparent in the record.

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of appeal on October 30, 2015 after the lapse of one month from October 27, 2015, which was the date of the second pleading, from October 27, 2015. Thus, the instant lawsuit was completed.

[1] On October 27, 2015, the date when one month lapses from October 27, 2015, and on November 28, 2015, and on November 28, 2015, the said period should be deemed to have elapsed on November 30, 2015 (Article 161 of the Civil Act). Accordingly, as to the instant lawsuit, a declaration of termination of the lawsuit as described in paragraph (1) of this Article is made.

(1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff’s appointment of an attorney and the company’s business-related issues were to be considered in light of the circumstances that became aware of the fact of being served later. However, the Plaintiff’s notification of the date of first pleading on October 2, 2015 and notification of the date of second pleading on October 16, 2015, respectively, cannot be deemed otherwise inasmuch as the Plaintiff was duly served on October 16, 2015, respectively.