2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “If a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting his/her duty of care within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.” In this context, the term “reasons for which the party cannot be held liable” refers to the causes for which the party could not observe the period even though he/she had performed the duty of care generally to conduct the litigation

However, in a case where the original judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant shall be deemed to have failed to know the service of the judgment without fault. If the Defendant was sentenced from the beginning without knowing the continuation of a lawsuit and the Defendant became aware of such fact only after the original judgment was served to the Defendant by public notice, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the Defendant’s failure to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal due to any cause not attributable to the Defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195 Decided November 10, 2005, etc.). B.

According to the records of this case, the court of first instance rendered a judgment of the first instance that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on September 26, 2013 after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant, a statement of guidance of lawsuit, and a date of pleading by public notice, and served the original copy of the judgment to the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant can recognize the fact that he/she was aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was rendered on December 21, 2017, and filed an appeal for subsequent completion on December 29, 2017.

C. Therefore, the Defendant’s appeal of this case was filed within two weeks from the date the Defendant became aware that the judgment of the first instance was served by public notice.