대여금
1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, with respect to the Plaintiff, KRW 70.6 million and its related thereto from May 15, 2013 to February 10, 2015.
1. The Plaintiff asserts that the subsequent appeal is unlawful.
Unless there exist special circumstances, if the original copy, etc. of a complaint and a copy of a judgment were served by service by public notice, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant is unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him, and thus, the defendant is entitled to file a subsequent appeal within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. "after the cause ceases to exist." "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. In ordinary cases, barring any special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only
(2) According to the records of this case, the court of first instance rendered a pleading by serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and the notice of the date for pleading by public notice, and then serving the Defendant at each service by public notice. On May 15, 2013, the court rendered a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant, and the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant was unaware of the fact that the first instance judgment was pronounced by public notice. On January 23, 2014, the court was not aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered by public notice, and was issued with a certified copy of the judgment after inspecting the records of trial and obtaining a certified copy on January 23, 2014, the court of first instance became aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice by public notice, and on January 27, 2014.
According to the above facts, the defendant shall observe the appeal period, which is the peremptory period, by failing to know the progress, result, etc. of the lawsuit in this case due to a cause not attributable to himself.