[2] The case denying the number of male children in the second-year elementary school who received the recommendation of performance, for about 8 years old and 3 months old

[2] The case holding that it is difficult to view that there are male children who received a certified copy of recommendations for performance recommendation as being man and children of the second-year elementary school for about 8 years of age as being man and children, in light of the age, educational level, the meaning and importance of the litigation law of the certified copy of recommendations for performance recommendation, etc., barring special circumstances, such as where the execution officer, who served the relevant litigation documents, notified male children of the importance of the documents to be served on the male and the right to deliver them to the parents, etc., and thus, most children of that age cannot be expected to deliver them to the recipient of the documents

According to the records, the court of the lawsuit filed against the re-appellant, which requested the execution recommendation decision to be entrusted to the execution officer of Seoul Western District Court and sent a certified copy of the performance recommendation decision to the re-appellant. On November 13, 2004, the execution officer went at the domicile of the re-appellant in order to serve a certified copy, etc. of performance recommendation decision around 14:14 on November 13, 2004, but he did not meet the re-appellant, and issued a certified copy of performance recommendation decision and a certified copy of litigation guide to the non-party living together with the re-appellant, and received the non-party's signature on the service document, and the non-party was aware of the fact that the non-party attended the second year of elementary school who attended the second year of 8:3 months after he received a certified copy, etc. of performance recommendation decision as of July 17, 1996.

In light of the Nonparty’s age, educational level, and the legal meaning and importance of a certified copy of the performance recommendation decision, etc., the execution officer who served the documents of the lawsuit may not be expected to deliver the documents to the Nonparty, barring special circumstances, such as informing the Nonparty of the importance of the documents served on the Nonparty and making it possible for the Nonparty to deliver them to his parents. Thus, it is difficult to deem that most children of the age age could not be expected that they receive the certified copy of the performance recommendation decision. Therefore, the supplementary service of the certified copy of the performance recommendation decision is not lawful, and the period for filing an objection against the performance recommendation decision was not in progress. Nevertheless, the lower court’s rejection of the re-appellant’s objection on the ground that the period for submitting the certified copy of the performance recommendation decision was lawful, and thus, the lower court’s rejection of the re-appellant’s objection was unlawful by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the results of the re-appellant’s rejection of the appeal.

Therefore, the order of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Kim Hwang-sik (Presiding Justice)