부당이득금반환등
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;
A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal to correct it within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.
Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice, instead of simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was delivered by public notice. Barring 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 when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received a new original of the judgment.
B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 delivered on February 24, 2006).
The first instance court served a copy, etc. of the complaint against the defendant by public notice and served a pleading. On November 18, 2016, the court rendered a judgment accepting the plaintiff's claim on November 18, 2016, and served the original copy of the judgment to the defendant by public notice on November 22, 2016. Meanwhile, the plaintiff filed an application for an explanation of property against the defendant as Seoul Northern District Court 2017Kao20713 on March 6, 2017, and the defendant became aware of the existence of the first instance judgment. The defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion on March 10, 2017, which is within two weeks from the date, is recognized by the records of the case, or is obvious to the court of this case. According to the above findings, the defendant failed to know the progress of the lawsuit of this case and the result thereof, etc. due to a cause not attributable to himself, and thus failed to observe the period of appeal by public notice within two weeks from the Jeju District Court.