물품대금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. If a copy of a written complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of an appeal for subsequent completion, and the original copy of the judgment, etc., were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks
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 any other 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 the original
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044 Decided January 10, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044). On November 11, 2015, the court of first instance rendered a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on November 11, 2015 after serving the Defendant a copy of the instant complaint and a writ of summons of the date of pleading by public notice, and subsequently serving the original copy of the judgment on the Defendant by public notice. The fact that the Defendant received the original copy of the judgment on February 8, 2017 and filed the instant appeal on the same day is apparent in the record.
Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s appeal for the subsequent completion of the litigation was a legitimate appeal meeting the requirements for the subsequent completion of the litigation.
The plaintiff argues that the defendant intentionally rejected the delivery of the complaint and other documents of the court of first instance, which is not in compliance with the peremptory period of appeal due to the defendant's fault.
However, the defendant is the complaint of the court of first instance and others.